Machiavelli's The Prince Still Relevant Today

Improved Essays
“All states or dominions which hold or have held sway over mankind are either republics or monarchies” (Machiavelli, 5). Machiavelli states that both monarchies and republics are the most widespread, used forms of government; however, as Machiavelli critiques the way monarchies are run, specifically in Florence under the Medici family, The Prince highlights how republics could be more beneficial. Although The Prince, by Niccolò Machiavelli, discusses both forms of government, the text is still largely relevant to contemporary society. One example of this is that the overall ideas from the text are still practiced in modern politics and culture, fiction and nonfiction. Furthermore, Machiavelli predicted the outcome of fallen monarchies, which …show more content…
One example of this is the way that Machiavelli believes power should be taken, by violent actions such as murder. “For it must be noted, that men must either be caressed or annihilated; they will revenge themselves for small injuries, but cannot do so for great ones; the injury therefore that we do to a man must be such that we need not fear his vengeance” (Machiavelli, 11). In today’s society, ‘Machiavellian’ techniques can be seen as ‘harsh’ and ‘cruel’. In addition, Machiavelli’s teachings mostly deal with monarchies and the problems that they face. “I will not here speak of republics, having already treated of them fully in another place. I will deal only with monarchies, and will discuss how the various kinds described above can be governed and maintained” (Machiavelli, 6). Although monarchies do exist in contemporary society, republics are the more popular form of government. Machiavelli states that a leader should not enter in an alliance, unless absolutely necessary. “And here it should be noted that a prince ought never to make common cause with one... unless necessity forces him to it…” (Machiavelli, 95). However, the United States has an alliance with many other countries, yet it remains one of the most dominant forces, military wise. An example of this is NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, whose goal is to, …show more content…
However, The Prince, to the larger extent is still relevant in contemporary society. Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince is not only still relevant, but predicted the fall of monarchies and the rise of other forms of government, such as republics. Although throughout the text Machiavelli does not discuss republics, but rather it discusses monarchies, it is apparently evident the rule of the government in Florence must change some of its ways. The Prince explains how Machiavelli believes the Medici family must go about the change. Yet, Machiavelli discusses how difficult changing government can be. “It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things” (Machiavelli,

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Niccolo Machiavelli’s book The Prince is a guide on how a proper prince should rule his nation. Machiavelli demonstrates how the past rulers have either been successful or not. Even as his audience were that of monarchs, many of his teachings’ outcomes can be seen in present day. In chapter 12, Machiavelli comments on the usage of mercenary troops.…

    • 311 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli thinks that one of the legitimate qualities as a leader is having a blood ties to the former leaders, and if a leader is chosen by such quality, then the union turns into a monarchy. However, the monarchy can be quickly turned into a tyranny, if the newly elected leader is less of the quality than the previous leader. Then the people of the higher class would end the tyranny, and the constitution would be just again under the lead of the aristocrats. But, as it did with the monarchy, the sons of the aristocrats may result in the constitutional change to the oligarchy. If then so, the populous would rise and constitute a popular government; however, it is destined to turn into anarchy (89-90).…

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the article “Subdue the Senate: Machiavelli’s Way of Freedom or Path to Tyranny” author John P. McCormick sets out to make the distinction between tyranny and civic leadership. McCormick states that Machiavelli “was fully aware of the tension between leaderly initiative and popular rule…” McCormick points out the conflict in Machiavelli’s argument by stating “How can a single individual follow Machiavelli's advice about favoring the people over the few without becoming a tyrant in the process?” he goes on to argue that if a leader can achieve this then the next obstacle is how this same leader can avoid catering to the elite or the grandi as Machiavelli referred to them. In the article McCormick argues that Machiavelli “advises astute leaders…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    First of all, the manner in which Machiavelli’s theory originated from was his study of history, allowing him to draw conclusions about what is inherent in human nature through past human acts. Humans, to a certain extent, are self-interested, although they can be easily won or lost. In times of trouble, man turns egotistical and look for a leg up within adversity; in times of prosperity, they are trustworthy and loyal to their ruler. Posing a famous political dilemma, Machiavelli asks whether “it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse” (Chapter XVII). Because he believes man becomes disloyal to the state when times are tough, and the ultimate purpose of the Prince is to maintain order within the state, Machiavelli argues a ruler should be feared.…

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This much power was a lot for one man to possess. With this sole form of government there is no check or balance on the king’s power; he answers to himself alone. It is for these reasons that a monarchy is not always the best form…

    • 900 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli came from a family of Florentine officials, though was never a outright citizen of Florence, due to the rules of the republic staging him as an outsider. The era in which Machiavelli had entered was one of common invasions by neighboring powers such as Rome, other city-states. The need for power came from the neighbors of Italy such as the Holy Roman Empire, France and Spain to control the region. The constant fluctuations in the newly formed Political-military alliances continually led to the change of loyalty instituting the rise and fall of many ruling governments. The world and times that Machiavelli was coming into was a strong factor to his view on how his vision of how Florence should be constructed later in life.…

    • 1663 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Machiavelli argued that the ruler or the politicians could achieve national goals with various ways, which include both angle and evil deed. “ Therefore, a prince must not worry about the infamy of being considered cruel when it is a matter of keeping his subjects united and loyal” ,“A prince, and especially a new prince, cannot observe all those things for which men are considered good, because in order to maintain the state he must often act against his faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion”Form these two sentence, we can clearly understand that the public virtue of Machiavelli can be realized by the evil deed. The division of two kinds of virtue doesn’t mean that Machiavelli deny the importance of private virtue. In his opinion, private virtue should play an important role within a range, like transforming man ' s ideology and cultivate good personality.…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    POLS 101 Howard Liu 567058 Of Those Things for Which Men And Especially Princes Are Praised or Blamed In the chapter 15 of The Prince first paragraph, Machiavelli remains how a government of prince treats with subjects and friend, , he apprehend that writing upon it also may be held presumptuous, especially as in the discussion of the same he shall differ from the rules laid down by others, justice is not useful. He departs from the orders of others in arguing this thing. However, he is to write something that may be useful to him for whom it is intended, it seems to me proper to pursue the real truth of the matter.…

    • 207 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    For hundreds of years, civilizations have depended on rulers to manage the people and prevent anarchy from erupting. While some leaders execute these actions with ease, others fail to do so and often lose their states to opposing rulers or forces. Niccoló Machiavelli, an Italian philosopher who lived from 1469 to 1527, describes in his book, The Prince, the characteristics he deems necessary in a strong ruler. Throughout the book, Machiavelli uses leaders of his time, like Cesare Borgia and King Louis XII, as examples of what a person should or should not do in order to maintain or improve his state. However, a more recent leader who exemplifies the qualities outlined by Machiavelli is King Louis XIV of France, as he was content with being…

    • 1107 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    If the ruler leaves behind any amount of dissatisfaction through his means there will always be a certain level of dissatisfaction among the people, creating a rift amongst them. Hence, if the current leader follows through Machiavelli’s theories and practices duplicitous acts of dishonesty he is generating a volume of instability. For example, Muammar Gaddafi, the autocratic leader of Libya, ruled with an iron fist. He would swiftly take down any opposition to his dictatorship and ruled through kleptocracy and fear. While he was unopposed for a long time, eventually the dissent leftover from his ruling caught up to him and he was executed after a successful coup…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Although Machiavelli and Socrates both lived during times of uncertainty, political fragmentation and violence, their philosophies about how the state should conduct itself are in direct contrast with one another. Machiavelli’s the Prince is founded on the principal that if a ruler wishes to maintain power, he should embody the ideology of pragmatism, while Socrates believes the state should follow him in his commitment to moral purity and justice. The inherent dissonance between these philosophies would lead Socrates to be unsupportive of Machiavelli’s concept of a prince, and consequently the political system Machiavelli would recommend he install, despite his apparent change in rhetoric from the Apology to the Crito. Throughout Plato’s interpretation…

    • 1488 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli’s Prince seeks to recruit and educate a ruler in the art of ruling. His ideal rulers are founders, men who created a fatherland and were not afraid to sacrifice lives and their self-interests for the common good. Machiavelli stresses that a ruler needs to appear virtuous while using vices when necessary to achieve positive results. Machiavelli teaches the ruler to divide his self. “It is essential, therefore, for a Prince […] to have learned how to be other than good, and to use or not use his goodness as necessity requires” (Machiavelli, 40).…

    • 1300 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The ideas that Machiavelli displays are the true ideals of the era, however, the irony and satire surrounding how they are presented are not genuine: ““Any man who tries to be good all the time is bound to come to ruin among the great number who are not good. Hence a prince who wants to keep his authority must learn how not to be good, and use that knowledge, or refrain from using it, as necessity requires” (Machiavelli). Machiavelli is revealing to the reader that in order for a prince to do a good job, he must lie to his subjects in order to be successful. He continues to be ironic and poke fun at the system in play and proves that these thoughts of the prince are not genuine. The beliefs that correspond with those of the era that are presented in The Prince are a strong ruling body in order to maintain social order:“Machiavelli, in the world we have described, often holds qualities like liberality, affability, generosity, courage, sincerity, gravity, and faith, to be of no more or less political value than their opposites, except in communication”(Moore).…

    • 1412 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Prince, in contrast, is a tyranny and bares tension with republicanism. A tyranny is exactly what is identified as a bad counterpart in the Discourses. This distinction does strain the potential relationship between the two texts, yet this is only validated if the two texts are read in mutual exclusion and without the consideration of external historical…

    • 1201 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli’s understanding of virtue and effective rule emphasizes the maintenance of political power and the disregard for morality, differing from the ideology of the classic political philosophers. Machiavelli’s concept of virtue is centered around the glorification of a ruler, facilitated by behavioural traits such as bravery, cleverness, deceptiveness, and ruthlessness. Effective rule requires these attributes, as the successful application of these characteristics towards the acquisition and maintenance of power will allow one to become a powerful leader. Machiavelli first explains the foundations of various principalities, such as hereditary and mixed principalities, as the maintenance of power differs…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays