Machiavelli The Fox And The Lion Analysis

603 Words 3 Pages
In the 16th Century, Niccolo Machiavelli gave the analogy of “the fox and the lion” in The Prince (1532), diverging politicians into two categories, stating that to be a successful leader one must be equally both. With a 24/7 media cycle that turns weeks into hours, 21st century politics have become unforgiving and unrelenting of errors. Julia Gillard’s succession over Kevin Rudd in 2010 saw her ability to be both fox and lion, distinguishing herself as effectively dealing with the Senate, managing her Party and making decisions, all of which Rudd lacked. Though Machiavelli is correct in stating that a political leader needs to be both alert and cunning (fox) as well as brave and bold (lion) it is difficult for a person of power to be capable …show more content…
Machiavelli’s assertion of cunning manipulation (“princes who have accomplished great deeds are those who have . . . known how to cunningly manipulate men’s minds . . . in the end they have surpassed those who laid their foundations upon sincerity” ) is evident within Gillard’s time as Prime Minister, during meetings, using her words as her weapon and conveying her persona with deadly content. She excelled at non-hierarchical, consensual leadership as well as being an experienced negotiator. Passing over 500 bills during her time in office, made her the most productive Prime Minister with a rate of 0.495, compared to John Howard at 0.452 and Kevin Rudd at 0.374 , emphasizing her audaciousness among her political rivals. Additionally, in her autobiography, ‘My Story’, Gillard writes “Every Prime Minister in the modern age must show fortitude in the face of a crushing, constant workload, a relentless often negative media, and many road blocks to policy change” , explaining in a modern sense, exactly what Machiavelli was expressing in The Prince; in order to withstand the pressures of government a leadership must be cunning and strong, a force incapable of being

Related Documents