In “The Prince,” Machiavelli discusses the terms and procedures he believes a prince should take to govern his society. Many perceive his views on human nature and leadership as evil and cruel towards his people. He justifies his views on human nature as he draws examples from the tactics and traits of successful leaders from the past. His ideas are comprised from justifying the means of his actions by its ends. Machiavelli selects the aspects of admirable historical figures to produce and describe his ideal prince.
Thomas Jefferson and Niccolo Machiavelli both believe that the actions of the people shape the characteristics of the ruler and define the type of authority that will be held towards the people. Machiavelli, the first great political philosopher of the Renaissance, argues all men are untrustworthy due to their selfish, self-interested and impulsive ways of life in his writing, The Morals of the Prince, and therefore, to keep the people under control the ruler must be prepared to be cruel and instill fear among the people. Opposing Machiavelli is Jefferson. In The Declaration of Independence Jefferson believes people can be trusted since they have the ability to make their own decisions. Whereas Machiavelli supports tyranny, Jefferson believes
There was once a time where knights were meant to be the epitome of chivalry; they symbolized honor, courage, justice and much more. However, not every knight matched the narrative of what a true knight should be. One way to teach people a certain value is through exemplary texts such as, “The wedding of King Arthur”. This story uses the knights and their actions to instruct the reader to be honorable by punishing the, shameful, dishonorable knights while rewarding the true and honorable one hence, guiding the reader towards a more honorable path. Sir Gawain does not show mercy to a defeated foe and is punished for it.
A moment examination may be made amongst criminal and sacred method for accomplishing power. Here, the primary purpose of contrast is not the expertise and experience of the ruler but rather well known demeanors toward the sovereign. A sovereign who comes to control through wrongdoing runs the most serious hazard since he might be compelled to confer some brutality toward his subjects, jeopardizing himself by reproducing contempt and disdain among the masses. A sacred sovereign, be that as it may, comes to control with the support of either the nobles or ordinary citizens, and his employment comprises basically of keeping the unsupportive gathering happy with his run the show. To entirety up, ability is to be favored over fortune since ability prompts to a more viable ruler who is probably going to gather enduring transcendence.
One his theories, stated in his book called Leviathan said that people are not able rule themselves because of how selfish mankind is and they need to be ruled by an iron fist. His political theory was that was also stated in Leviathan was that we should respect government authority under all circumstances to avoid violence. Hobbes was scared of the outcome of the social contract which meant people could get rid of the government if they were unhappy with what they were getting. In order to make well with the social contract he states in Leviathan that people should be completely obedient to the government. His reasoning was that if there was no government, there would be chaos.
Citing how the society in the story is being handicapped due to the amendments, the quote hints that the government is controlling the people and that no matter how someone may see it, that person and everyone else lacks freedom in every way. Also, recommending that dying for personal beliefs is far better than succumbing to a figures’ plans for life, it portrays exactly what Harrison did and what he received as the result of standing up for his beliefs. Thus, the sign is significant because it summarizes Harrisons actions into a powerful statement that hints at the evils ongoing in the dystopian society and how death is far better than slaving away in the conditions of the
Malcolm X is controversial, he said that equality should be attained "by any means necessary". Many think Malcolm X only preached violence and hate, others think of him as doing what was necessary. While he didn’t advocated peace, he helped to empower people to stand up for their rights. This was Malcolm’s goal and shows that he had good intentions. However, his good intentioned were covered up by his flaws.
Thoreau mentions it too, “..bt if it is of such nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say break the law” (Thoreau 6). They both encourage the individual to break the law if they believe it is unjust, there is nothing wrong with breaking the law if following would hurt you, the individual has the right to not follow any injustice. Both King and Thoreau want to end social injustice to improve the world. It is the responsibility of the individual to resist injustice since the government acts unjust due to the lack virtue, morality, and stamina from its people and leader. Although the government is filled with injustice Thoreau and King have hope that one day one individual will put an end to social
Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes both recognized during their lives that they lived in an imperfect world and had similar ideas about how to prevent their society from becoming disarray. Both great thinkers agree that men need a power structure in place, so that men 's ambition do not become too great and plunge society into chaos. Machiavelli 's The Prince approaches this issue from a practical worldview, as Machiavelli was a seasoned politician in the city-state of Florence and authored his work so rulers can retain their power in society. He uses his personal experiences in politics in order to convey that people are flawed in their thinking and "for many have pictured republics and principalities which in fact have never been known or seen, because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live" (Machiavelli 406). A single man thinks that he knows what is best for society, but in reality, has a warped and selfish perception of the world.
Extremism is a plague of the human mindset that typically leads to suffering, and it must be acknowledged and kept in check so society can prosper. Religions are typically blamed for causing extremists to perform their horrific acts, and they are not completely to blame. Religion can bring out extremists and give them a goal or idea to follow, but it does not create the mindset. Humans have possessed a natural tendency to take things to the extremes, as evidenced by the Crusades and and the American Revolution. In general, these human tendencies lead to a useless loss of life.
Machiavelli was not looking for princes to become cruel, militant tyrants, but rather wanted effectiveness to unite a kingdom and to unite the people. Through Francesco Sforza, Cesare Borgia, and even Pope Julius II, the author is stating the unspoken truth, supporting it with the figures he derived inspiration, those who used underhanded methods when needed to hold reigns on their power, that "for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good. Hence it is necessary that a prince who is interested in his survival learn to be other than good, making use of his capacity or refraining from it according to need" (Machiavelli
Machiavelli expresses that, “…a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated…” (79). Though this is not to say that a prince cannot be cruel when it is needed; like the Duke of Valentinois, Cesare Borgia. Machiavelli notes that Borgia was seen as a cruel leader and that his cruelty helped in restored peace and loyalty to the Romagna, so being cruel can be used for a good cause and being known as cruel prince is not necessarily an unacceptable thing, but a prince must be careful in his actions and only be cruel when it is necessary to avoid being hated by his