Summary Of Machiavelli's The Republic

Books of the past can still relate to how society is today. Especially when the book is about political philosophy or political science. Political philosophy is the study of politics, liberty, justice, law, and rights, which leads into why these things are needed, as well as what makes a legitimate government, what rights should or should not be protected and why. Political science is about possessing the knowledge of dealing with systems within a government, the behavior of the government and the examination of political actions. One of the most famous ancient Greek philosophers was Plato, and the book he is known for is The Republic, which was written around 380 B.C. The book is about political philosophy and concerns the definitions of justice …show more content…
The first 25 chapters are guidelines for situations the ruler will experience and what to do to avoid or overcome those experiences. The first few chapters in the book are about how to gain power and keep power. Gaining power comes from understanding which principality the prince is conquering and how to rule each specific principality. Principalities can be hereditary or new. They can also be ruled with the help of ministers or nobles. Ministers are appointed by the prince and help keep the attention on the prince where as nobles are not appointed and have their own groups of influence. It is also important to understand if the prince gains power through buying it, then they are weak and will not know how to rule. The middle of the chapters explain ruling with an army, war and how a prince should act. Princes can have their own troops, mercenary troops or auxiliary troops. For war, a prince must study successful rulers past and their strategies during war such as Moses, Cyrus, Romulus and Theseus, as well as study the geography of their area. This prince should act as a man beast. Machiavelli’s definition of a man beast is that man is the law and beast is the force. So the ruler should use laws as a man and force as a beast to maintain power. Once power is achieved, maintaining it consist of appointing either nobles or ministers. A ruler must avoid being hated at all costs. This is done by not taking property or …show more content…
The State for Plato will be at its best if the people are treated as many. Plato said this in the middle of book IV talking about the State. “I do not mean to say in reputation or appearance, but in deed and truth,” (Internet Classics). This is where Machiavelli greatly disagrees. In Machiavelli’s principality, one has to have a good reputation in order to align with other principalities in the area so they will not be at risk of being conquered. For example, if a principality is known for a weak reputation, than there is nothing from stopping a neighboring ruler from coming to conquer the principality because in Machiavelli’s practical guide for ruling, the more land the prince conquers, the more praise they will be met with from the subjects. Another area where Machiavelli disagrees with Plato is on property. In the state everyone should be equal and not have property to him or herself. If he or she had his or her own property, then that would be unequal, thus others becoming unhappy and breaking the harmony in the state. Machiavelli on the other had says property of the subjects must be left alone so that the subjects remain happy. If the ruler takes away property from the subjects, then those subjects will become unhappy with the ruler and revolt against them. Both Plato and Machiavelli’s view on property is like today; assuming