Political views have changed throughout the years with regards to how different Kings, Dictators, Pharaohs, and Princes perceived the foolproof ruler should be. Machiavelli a philosopher and politician, has depicted how he believes a prince should be in his handbook, The Prince. Stating different examples and theories he explains what a prince is entitled to follow to be the unflawed prince. Machiavelli introduces us to terms that define a prince and how they come to be imperative to a well-defined ruling, he thenceforth proceeds to show us the way rulers come into power and how to stay in that power and not lose out for simple mistakes. His handbook can even be seen as a step by step guide to becoming Prince of the decade as it pertains to
…show more content…
Machiavelli’s political philosophy would be the ruling of a Princedom.
To begin Machiavelli states that a princes’ should or more than likely be hereditary, meaning “the sovereignty is derived through an …show more content…
Many points he makes are about war and conquest over a certain piece of land. Mentioning rulers that had achieved many conquests like Alexander the Great, he conquered all of Asia and died before actually possessing his lands, but even then his newly acquired kingdoms did not revolt. Machiavelli uses this example because it shows excellent ruling during and after the conquest. Even after the death of Alexander, “Nevertheless, his successors were able to keep their hold, and found in doing so no other difficulty than arose from their own ambition and mutual jealousies” (Machiavelli 8). His arguments make sense and he uses many to make his point crystal clear. Machiavelli not only uses examples of success but of defeat. Take Italy for example, he states that they lost their states due to their own indolence, they believed other people would back them up when they did not even know that their own populace was hostile and did not secure themselves well enough. Every example that Machiavelli states correlates to his main topic, becoming The Prince. With intelligent leaders Princes’ get outstanding outcomes, but with ignorant rulers, society is bound to suffer. Following Machiavelli’s rules according to Machiavelli himself will get you far as a leader for your people. Be it that you understand the way he argues and
Machiavelli’s political philosophy would be the ruling of a Princedom.
To begin Machiavelli states that a princes’ should or more than likely be hereditary, meaning “the sovereignty is derived through an …show more content…
Many points he makes are about war and conquest over a certain piece of land. Mentioning rulers that had achieved many conquests like Alexander the Great, he conquered all of Asia and died before actually possessing his lands, but even then his newly acquired kingdoms did not revolt. Machiavelli uses this example because it shows excellent ruling during and after the conquest. Even after the death of Alexander, “Nevertheless, his successors were able to keep their hold, and found in doing so no other difficulty than arose from their own ambition and mutual jealousies” (Machiavelli 8). His arguments make sense and he uses many to make his point crystal clear. Machiavelli not only uses examples of success but of defeat. Take Italy for example, he states that they lost their states due to their own indolence, they believed other people would back them up when they did not even know that their own populace was hostile and did not secure themselves well enough. Every example that Machiavelli states correlates to his main topic, becoming The Prince. With intelligent leaders Princes’ get outstanding outcomes, but with ignorant rulers, society is bound to suffer. Following Machiavelli’s rules according to Machiavelli himself will get you far as a leader for your people. Be it that you understand the way he argues and