Machiavelli's "The Prince"

[brownprose]

---

My personal summary/insights of the book:

- Ruthlessness is better than popularity/admiration
- Power and arms go hand in hand.
- Cruelty is a necessary tool to retain power (although extreme cruelty may also spell disaster)
- Paranoia is a day-to-day agenda to thwart rebellion.
- Religion must come to play in effective ruling (This is my interpretation of chapter 11, I could be wrong)

I don't know if I had given justice to the book and to its author (Machiavelli) based on the above summary...and if I did, Mea Culpa Mr. Machiavelli, may God have mercy on your soul

Overall I think it's a must-read for those who study politics or governance.

What's your take guys?

[The_Child]

quite interestingly, if you read his other book (a compilation), The Discourses, you'd realize that its really the opposite of what he advocated for in his The Prince. Consider that: the Prince was written to secure, with all means necessary, power and take hold of it long enough to create change. (the italian states at that time was fragmented, and war was in the air,the pope in rome and the king of France made it more interesting by adding more headaches to an already war-torn region) the discourses discusses more on maintaining a state during peace times. Thus, the emphasis on more peaceful themes. cheers.

in reflection to our current Philippine situation, with all the attempted coup's, military, civil(rallies) or political(impeachment) do you think it is right for the President to be Machiavellian ? (just a thought, and a topic in own right)

[The_Child]

... and everybody was interested in seeing a unified italy and it was only possible, in Machiavelli's perspective, through the suspension of 'conventional' morality.

[Isteb]

read it with robert greene's The Laws of Power and Sun-Tzu's The Art of War. It's a MUST READ for anyone who wants to rise in the corporate world.

[brownprose]

in reflection to our current Philippine situation, with all the attempted coup's, military, civil(rallies) or political(impeachment) do you think it is right for the President to be Machiavellian ? (just a thought, and a topic in own right)

hmmm...The Machiavellian order/rule posits on the incorruptibility of the prince. In the case of GMA, she shouldn't even think about it...even for a second. Besides, she isn't a prince or a princess anyway - just trying to be one I guess. Rephrasing Lozada's statement, "The Arroyo's have made the Philippines their kingdom." LOLs

[forester]

YOU ARE RIGHT BROWN, IT IS THE ESSENCE OF "THE PRINCE".

Last semester, I taught the subject Politics and Governance. And all coverage for the Midterm exam is hinged on Machiavelli's thesis on Throne [power], Perpetuation [avoidance of dethronement], Means [all necessary strategic acts to eliminate threats to the throne], and Acts of the Prince [his action of hypocrisy, relation with religion, selection between love-respect-and-fear, reliance on advisers and allies, and total doubt on trust and confidence]

[brownprose]

YOU ARE RIGHT BROWN, IT IS THE ESSENCE OF "THE PRINCE".

Last semester, I taught the subject Politics and Governance. And all coverage for the Midterm exam is hinged on Machiavelli's thesis on Throne [power], Perpetuation [avoidance of dethronement], Means [all necessary strategic acts to eliminate threats to the throne], and Acts of the Prince [his action of hypocrisy, relation with religion, selection between love-respect-and-fear, reliance on advisers and allies, and total doubt on trust and confidence]

Forester, I would love to hear you say "The End Justifies the Means."

Seriously, would you consider the Machiavellian thought intrinsically "MAKA-VILLAIN" if taken in light of achieving a noble and just end?

[forester]

@Brown:

My answer is NO.
1. The intent is to make the Prince firm, tough, with strong will, fearless [or ruthless, etc], and reliable according to macho-standard of the time;
2. The purpose is based on the principle taught in classical schools of Machiavelli's time that "the highest form of respect to one's self is to maintain self preservation". This axiom resolved the issues whether "self defense" is punishable by law [a legal-philosophical controversy prior to the rennaisance era].
3. The prince is someone who could be all of us, in all struggles of life. Political colors of The Prince is only a myopic view of what human reality of struggles for survival. The famous biologist Mr. Darwin maintained that the "unfit will be eliminated". Hence, Machiavelli, just as Prometheus, gave human being the formula of survival.
4. Although in Machiavelli's The Prince all suggested demeanors were strange, wierd, ruthless, etc., it is nothing but a reflection of human capability to do anything for the purpose of his own survival. THAT IS HOW I PERCEIVED IT. I hope I have not assumed too much.

[aya_diwata]

My personal summary/insights of the book:

- Ruthlessness is better than popularity/admiration
- Power and arms go hand in hand.
- Cruelty is a necessary tool to retain power (although extreme cruelty may also spell disaster)
- Paranoia is a day-to-day agenda to thwart rebellion.
- Religion must come to play in effective ruling (This is my interpretation of chapter 11, I could be wrong)

My brother urged me to read this book. He's not an advocate but he agrees that it's a must-read. I wouldn't argue on your outline of Machiavelli's depiction.
[br]Posted on: March 21, 2008, 01:16:53 AM_________________________________________________

quite interestingly, if you read his other book (a compilation), The Discourses, you'd realize that its really the opposite of what he advocated for in his The Prince. Consider that: the Prince was written to secure, with all means necessary, power and take hold of it long enough to create change. (the italian states at that time was fragmented, and war was in the air,the pope in rome and the king of France made it more interesting by adding more headaches to an already war-torn region) the discourses discusses more on maintaining a state during peace times. Thus, the emphasis on more peaceful themes. cheers.

in reflection to our current Philippine situation, with all the attempted coup's, military, civil(rallies) or political(impeachment) do you think it is right for the President to be Machiavellian ? (just a thought, and a topic in own right)

it was odd.. from what I know The Prince was written during a time of political turbulence as a practical guide to help Lorenzo de’ Medici stay in power. However, Lorenzo did not agree with many of Machiavelli’s suggestions.

kinda but not exactly off topic:
And about our national situation.. I have always regarded our "president" as Machiavellian. What she's been doing is clever - designed to battle against possible reactions. She picked Noli De Castro as a vp. That was very wise. The people won't consider De Castro to be the next Philippine Idle, that's why many are apprehensive in supporting the actions against GMA because of fear. Fear in the rule of idiocy if not anarchy.

Gen. Palparan's recognition in her administration is a manifestation on how she supports the political killings in the country as it benefits her.

[jhoy]

gloria is not quite the prince bero pwede cya ang baobao sa iya planet.