Human Nature Of Government

Improved Essays
The Human Nature and its Relation with the Existence of a Government

Politics is everywhere. As a matter of fact, it can be synonymous with authority, conflict and competition. When one has power, he has the ability to let others follow his schema. Sometimes, one seeks to acquire and maintain power to the extent that he competes with the others which later on results to conflict. This idea is still evident nowadays. However, our world has a different view and taste in politics at this instant. Today, politics have become a much bombarded term. It has a mixture of what once was, what is, what is to be. Politics is directly associated with corruption, killing, vote-buying, ill-gotten wealth, lack of political will, and the like. Politics per
…show more content…
A very responsive government does not only protect the rights of its people but it also promotes the general welfare of the latter. Primarily, the government exists because the people created it. It is a mechanism where the affairs of the state are enforced and are regulated. It is the agency of the state by which its will is formulated, expressed, and is brought into reality. Our present type of government and politics has evolved over time. We have different types of government—may it be presidential or parliamentary, unitary or federal, or a government that upholds a democratic society. But there is still one question that remains to be answered despite all of these progress and alteration. Hence, it is the paramount yearning of this paper to assess the relationship of the human nature with the government and its establishment. Furthermore, this paper argues that the human nature and behavior of …show more content…
Machiavelli considers that a ruler governs his constituents using different strategies, considering that people have different personalities and interests. The ruler uses variety of emotions like love, hatred, fear, and cruelty. People behave well when they are governed well. For Machiavelli, a ruler must know when to apply law and when to apply violence and inflict fear. When one is obedient and is submissive to the policies promulgated, the law must apply. If one is behaving like a brute, stringent discipline must be made in order to inflict fear and reverence. Likewise, Machiavelli believes that when a ruler gains the trust and love of the people, it is expected that the latter will support him and his end for the advancement of the good of the society. This is how a person maintains political power. However, Locke criticizes Machiavelli’s work. For Locke, the government should encompass the manner of fair play and equity. In order for the government to survive, it must serve the best interest of the people. If it is not addressing the needs of the people, then the citizens have all the right to rebel and overthrow the government. Locke who believes that people are inherently good shares the same sentiment with Machiavelli who, on the other hand, believes that people should be controlled because there are inclinations that they become selfish and greedy. Locke

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Hoai Thuong Thi Nguyen Professor Hans Klein PHIL 3127 December 11, 2015 PAPER #2 Plato, Herman And Chomsky About Democracy Leadership is very important in a country because it has the capacity to take it to the next level of success and even lead the people during times of war into fighting successful battles that ends in victory. The philosophers like Herman and Chomsky and Plato however had different views on how the people should be governed. The different types of governments are very important to be understood so that every person who wants to understand why his government is not functioning properly can do so through the lens of the philosophers. Herman and Chomsky states that there are reasons why the government of the day may resort…

    • 1451 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Jefferson and Machiavelli had two very different ideas in terms of the right way to rule. The two were essentially complete opposites. Jefferson thought it should be the mass who ruled the ruler, that the moral thing should always be done in order to live in a efficient and equality-driven government. Machiavelli, on the other hand, thought it would be the ruler who ruled the masses, that the Prince should put aside the “right thing to do” and use the ideology of functionalism to decide what is best for the government. However, it is hardly useful to compare the two ideas.…

    • 230 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli and Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca went through different experiences that led them to have their own perspectives in human nature and create their ideals for good governance. The simple fact that Cabeza de Vaca was unfortunate enough to have a hard time throughout the expedition made him more open minded about human nature, while Machiavelli had a set idea of what human nature was and how it ties to good governance. Machiavelli's view on human nature is the same as what is a good governance a good leader and a good human being is someone who knows how to be respected and feared without being hated and how that leads to have the people the Prince governs happy and on his side. Cabeza de Vaca has a more down to earth view on human nature but that differs…

    • 2016 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Politics and ethics are two vital components of a functioning society. When these two components are carefully balanced a sate/society can remain organized and fair to its citizens. In a realistic society the idea of what political ethics and human nature consist of varies, but in an idealistic society political ethics and human nature possess a common ground. Political ethics and human nature were a mutual understanding at some point but as societies grew, citizens began to think as individuals instead of as a collective. As a result of this self-serving behavior, inequality and the mistreatment of others quickly followed.…

    • 1706 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Why is society the way it is today? Most will say, “Because of history.” Yes that is correct, but why? Society is the way it is today because of influential beliefs, and philosophers who portrayed and evolved these beliefs. Of these philosophers, the ones being studied are Niccolo Machiavelli, John Locke, and Karl Marx.…

    • 1751 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Niccolo Machiavelli and The Prince Introduction Niccolo Machiavelli is a famous statesman, thinker and one of the founders of modern political science. He was born in the year 1469 at Florence. That is the age of political chaos. The whole country was separated to city governments。In this case, he wrote his masterpiece, The Price, which to be as much praised as blamed. Machiavelli used terse and forceful words elaborate his argument, which had a profound influence in history.…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Plato and Machiavelli looked into what is best for people and a government structure that can bring to a better society, happiness, and wealth for everyone. Both Plato and Machiavelli focused on a civil society that would work to secure the rule of law and protecting individual’s freedoms, as well as stability as a whole. They agreed that a government or a ruler would have to work for conditions that will bring prosperity of his citizens and a pleasing and satisfactory way of living. These two philosophers were too realistic in emphasizing a political structure of how government should perform to keep its citizens satisfied overall. Plato, for instance, was expecting an ideal government or a “just’’ society that would promote justice for…

    • 1521 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli, both grappling with regional instability and constant war, arrive at different frameworks for handling man’s inherent propensity for conflict from very similar models of human behavior. Hobbes, watching his fellow countrymen fight each other during the English Civil War, decided that humans perpetually desire more power to secure their well-being and therefore incline toward warfare as a means to achieve this. Machiavelli, similarly accustomed to the restless Italian Peninsula, also labeled man as power-hungry and self-centered, always striving for enough freedom to ensure one’s prosperity. In the absence of the structure and organization provided by a government, a situation dubbed mankind’s ‘natural…

    • 1255 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the written work “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli the author elaborates on how a prince can only be a strong leader if he engages in duplicity. Machiavelli focused on a more realistic and immoral strategy to keep the people of his time unified, realpolitik a system based on practical rather than moral considerations. The author, Niccolo Machiavelli, goes through great depths to explain why it takes rulers who are “cruel, dishonest, duplicitous, and manipulative.” There are many great examples to prove his ideology, however, the writing is very subjective and bias as Machiavelli does not give a rebuttal to the different kinds of ruling. He writes “The Prince” after the current leading family of his time falls in order to keep the stability…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli spent a large majority of his aristocratic platform defaming the many intrinsic characteristics of human emotion and experience. He consciously ignored the essential acts of care and compassion while promoting a message of fear and hate. His teachings offered detailed instructions on the succession and maintenance of a fear-abiding society encapsulated by submission. His philosophy stated that the best interest of the general public was to irrefutably follow the rule of law. To Machiavelli, a human life could be explained as an expendable resource, awaiting its designated task to serve the ruling class.…

    • 904 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    These classic works present independent arguments. However, the concluding lesson is the same: engaged citizens must call leaders to moderation and justice. The timeless political wisdom from both authors highlights the flaws of human nature in leadership and yield insight applicable and necessary to modern politics. Citizens must remain vigilant to limit human nature’s overpowering tendencies by moderating leadership and encouraging…

    • 1712 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In his book, Machiavelli believes that a ruler should educate himself by reading the history of the past rulers so that the ruler will have knowledge on how to go about wars. Glerberzon states, “ a prince should learn from records of practical or real experience”. Machiavelli’s theory is based on experience to gain knowledge, whereas Locke believes that society should look at reason and the rule of law rather than state of nature. Machiavelli believes that in order to be a good ruler, they have to be willing to be amoral. Glerberzon states, “a Prince must do whatever he has do [good or evil] to retain power, while always maintaining “the appearance of virtue” .…

    • 880 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The Organization of Society Machiavelli’s The Prince, a story is told, explaining multiple routes of portraying his definition of a “good” prince. He then divulges his beliefs of how one should never forget to prepare for or contemplate war, study history, remain armed at all times and be a “miser”. Rousseau’s The Origin of Civil Society, is based upon an entirely different morale which derives from reasoning and ethics.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In many political philosopher’s eyes, there is a special relationship between the ideas of moral goodness and legitimate authority. Some of these political philosophers believed that the use of political power was only morally correct if it was exercised under a ruler who had virtuous morals. These rulers who had virtuous morals were then told that in order to be successful, they needed to make decisions in accordance with the standards of ethical goodness. This moralistic view of authority is what Machiavelli criticizes in his work “The Prince.” In Machiavelli’s book, “The Prince,” the readers are introduced to political values that do not necessarily give full recognition to morality or religion.…

    • 933 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In this essay I will be discussing the similarities and differences discovered in the writing of Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince and Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan. Primarily, I will begin by explaining each of the authors approaches to obtaining and maintaining political stability; I will then identify the differences in their approaches. Secondly, I will discuss and compare each of their ideologies concerning humanity and then I will be highlighting their commonalities on the subject. Lastly, a conclusion will be provided consisting of my opinion.…

    • 1601 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays