Machiavelli's The Prince

In Machiavelli’s The Prince, there are several guidelines that a ruler must follow in order to achieve success. A ruler must be willing to do anything possible to ensure that the state survives, while maintaining his reputation. A ruler can not be inclined to be moral, as doing so would endanger the state and the people. He must not be loved, but rather feared to maintain power and have the respect of his people. Force must be used to restore discipline, order and well-being. A ruler must never be cruel to the people, but instead send one of his commanders to do the dirty work. This will have the people hating the commander and respecting the ruler when he eliminates the commander. Loyalty from his people comes primarily when the …show more content…
A ruler must be ready to undertake any virtue necessary for the survival of the state. He must be willing to do the good and the bad regardless of what it deems. “Having recovered credibility, and not wanting to have to put the loyalty of the French or anyone else to the test, Borgia turned to trickery. He was so good at disguising his intentions that even the Orsini made peace with him, sending Paolo Orsini as mediator. (Chapter 7, The Prince)” In this example, Cesare Borgia proves that it is necessary for one to be tricky. Trickery should not catch the attention of the public. One should never get caught because the people will not understand. Lying should only be used when it is for the sake of the kingdom. The most effective ruler is one who distances himself from morals, and ethics. Therefore it is better to be forceful, crafty and cruel. Machiavelli’s main rule is that a ruler should be as good as is necessary, but should be able to switch up at a moment’s notice for the good of the state. Everything depends on the loyalty and support of the …show more content…
He should have had one of his advisors do the cruel action. This action caused the rest of the animals to view him as a pig mad with power. He was cruel, and some animals hated him for it. A good ruler would never have his people hate him, since the root of his power comes from loyalty. His power is not stable, and the animals could revolt at any time in response to this heinous act. He also let the people see he was weak, since he did not kill the pigs. He let the dogs only attack, but not eliminate. This makes the animals wonder if Napoleon would be willing to do what is necessary for the survival of the estate. Napoleon suffered because he let his ego and power get to his