The Prince was written by Niccolo Machiavelli in the 18th century. The book describes the perfect ruler. This piece was written in honor of Lorenzo De Medici, to gain the Medici family’s favor. Even though at the end of the book Machiavelli is basically graveling and praising Medici, the reader can sense Machiavelli’s mockery of patriarch and nobility. It is a very reasonable conclusion that Machiavelli does not like the monarchy, however he wishes to return to the city and work so he can provide for his family. He did not believe in what he was writing, he was just writing what needed to be written for his and his family’s survival. This statement suggests, that a ruler must have a strong will and must have a mean strike. Someone might view
In The Prince they talked about how a king doesn’t want to be hatred by his people but have them respect him so he can’t be to nice. So a king in this book they should be stingy, cruel, breaking promises, and having a great staff of people. Stingy would be better than being nice to your people shows them that you are the king and they need to respect you and your decision. Cruel is better than being nice also if someone takes sometime from you there has to be something done about it! Morality and ethics are not a big deal to break in The Prince breaking promises so it will benefits the king is okay to do!
Questions: 1. Machiavelli wrote The Prince because he wanted to teach future princes how to rule by giving his opinions and examples through history and previous princes. Not just that, but he also teaches and talks about how to obtain power, invulnerability, and respect. Machiavelli does this by saying what is necessary to do and what is definitely unnecessary to do using examples from the past. It is a rule book for politics to follow in Machiavelli’s own opinions.
Machiavelli wrote about a fictitious prince, describing how he is a terrible being who has no respect for people who have a lower status than him. He is described as being selfish and untrustworthy. His writing about this prince was supposed to replicate princes and kings that were ruling and open he reader’s eyes to real issues occuring. In Document 1 there is an excerpt from The Prince, written by Machiavelli, telling about how terrible the Prince of England. Document 1 states, “For all men in general this observation may be made: they are ungrateful, fickle, and deceitful, eager to avoid dangers, and avid for gain, and while you are useful to them they are all with you, but when it [danger] approaches they turn on you”.
His underlying point was that a ruler should have a certain amount of liberality and stinginess, it was his idea that it was better for a prince to be thought stingy, he explains, than for him to grow poor through lavishness and then be forced to rob his subjects. As well as, when the use of force deemed necessary, he advised the prince to lead a military force consisting of citizens of the domain who will fight for their country, instead of untrustworthy foreign mercenaries. Another aspect was whether or not it is better to be feared than to be
Being a prince is not as easy as it may seem. There are good and bad decisions a prince can make. Machiavelli has his own standards on how a prince should behave. According to Machiavelli, a prince could be considered a lion, a fox, or a wolf. The lion is fierce but doesn’t have the smarts, while a fox has the smarts but isn 't fierce.
“An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind” -Mahatma Gandhi. Machiavelli’s Prince shows that a leader should be aggressive and feared, but Mahatma Gandhi believed it was better to be peaceful and loved. Non-religious, unforgiving and impassive are just a few words that describe the Prince. He also sees no reason to keep his word and values image over substance. Even though Gandhi and Machiavelli’s Prince are both wise leaders, they are extremely different because of their religious beliefs, violent/non-violent tendencies, and value of the truth.
According to Machiavellian, concerning the secretaries of a prince, it is significant for a prince to be careful to select a servant because the servant represent a prince. The loyal servant will represent an image of a good prince, but disloyal will represent an image of incomplete prince. The servant must have less thinking about personal than the rules, if not, he can never be a good servant. Also a characteristic of Machiavellian will have scheming plan, and be cunning. Claudius had done terribly and graceless, which make him the archetypal as Machiavellian character.
A prince must be able to control his people in order to keep the princedom united. If this does not happen, the prince’s princedom will not be stable and the prince will not be a good ruler. “For he who dwells disorder by a few signal examples will in the end be more merciful than
The Prince Machiavelli is the author of the book “The Prince”, which consists of inspiration from the Roman Empire in order to change Italy for the better. Machiavelli is inspired by how unified the Roman Empire was and realized that’s how it became so powerful. As a result Machiavelli wrote a book about what type of leader it would take to build a new and improved unified Italy. When Machiavelli wrote “The Prince” it was almost intended to recollect a hand book for rulers; however, his style of teaching was different than that of an “ethical” man.
How Princes Should Act Chapters 16 to 23 of The Prince are concerned with answering a number of questions a ruler may have when conducting the affairs of state and since a ruler acts out of necessity for the state, the advice given reveals what Machiavelli believes about the state (Nederman (2014), chapter 2). Machiavelli regularly employs historical examples or analogies in order to explain the political utility of decisions made by rulers and is much less concerned with the perception of a ruler by the subjects. Since the perception of the ruler is of little concern, legacy should not be a concern for a ruler because the only legacy worth remembering is the continued success of the state. This is however not usually the case because the masses are more likely to remember a person for their vices; Adolf Hitler and Germany comes to mind as an example where the state grew stronger but the leader is remembered as indisputably evil.
According to Machiavelli, ideal prince is a risk-taker who puts a military on action, as the people respect the warrior. An ideal prince thinks for himself rather than relying on others, knows how to read characters, and does not surround himself with flatterers. He lives in reality, not fantasy. He works hard, utilizes his own mind, and makes survival of his guide. The ideal leader is neither loved nor hated, but respected.
Hence, he uses personal pronouns like “you” and “I” as well as phrases like “My reply is.” This makes it seem like The Prince becoming famous was neither Machiavelli’s first priority nor real purpose; he simply wanted to express his knowledge on the western government and gives advice on how to be a strong leader. Also, some of his words sound like he was in grief. For instance, the sentence that says “But as soon as you need help, they turn against you.” It could be that he was disappointed or was betrayed that he decided to put together The Prince.
Have you or a loved one suddenly been thrust into a position of power? Do you need help ruling a civilization and have absolutely no idea where to start? Well look no further as The Prince may be the book for you. All that we ask in return is that you shred any human decency you have and begin to think solely about your own position and well being. In a few simple, yet completely kunning and immoral lessons, you will be the conniving and notorious leader that you’ve always wanted to be!
I. Machiavelli In his famous work the Prince Niccolo Machiavelli exposes what it takes to be a good prince and how only this good price and keep control over his state. There are many different qualities that make a man a good ruler but there are some that are more essential than others. In this work Machiavelli stresses the importance of being a warrior prince, a wise prince, and knowing how to navigate the duality of virtù and vices. Without these attributes there was no way that a prince could hold together their state and their people.