Machiavelli Contradictions

Improved Essays
The Prince was written by Niccolo Machiavelli in the early 16th century in order to once again get into favor of the ruling family of Florence: The Medici’s. Publically, the goal of The Prince was to inform a ruler (Lorenzo de’ Medici) how to maintain power and stay in good favor of the subjects they rule over. Because of the many contradictions between The Prince and The Discourses, countless scholars have been perplexed by what Machiavelli’s true intentions were. Although it seems like Machiavelli is writing a set of instructions for Lorenzo de’ Medici to become a good prince, I believe that he is trying to sabotage Leonardo in order to reinstitute a republic. Throughout his letter to Lorenzo, Machiavelli proposes many ideas that on the …show more content…
I do not believe that it was an accident that Machiavelli gave such poor advice, it is simply one of the ways he will convince Lorenzo to destroy his political career. One of the first ways that Machiavelli tries to sabotage Lorenzo with power hunger is to advise him to practically blackmail his subjects: “A wise prince should think of a method by which his citizens, at all times and in every circumstance, will need the assistance of the state and himself; and then they will always be loyal to him” (335). While it may be true that a prince’s subjects needing him is necessary, it is still a plan doomed to fail because that is blackmail. When the people Lorenzo rules over realize that he is doing things that will force them to remain his subjects forever, there is a chance for up rise and overthrow his power. Another way that Machiavelli tries to deceive Lorenzo to form an unhealthy vision of what power should look like: “A prince must not worry about the reproach of cruelty when it is a matter of keeping his subjects united and loyal” (339). Such advice is clearly sabotage because any good leader will worry about the well being of their subjects and will worry about the reproach of cruelty. Some readers may see the chapter regarding fear and love as accurate and not a scheme in sabotaging Lorenzo, I believe that if Lorenzo is feared as much …show more content…
If the subjects being ruled over thought that Lorenzo was using too many resources for personal spoils, eventually they will up rise and Machiavelli would get what he truly wanted: the removal of Lorenzo from power. Machiavelli explains how Lorenzo should appear to be generous: “I say that it would be good to be considered generous; nevertheless, generosity used in such a manner as to five you a reputation for it will harm you” (338). Even though Machiavelli presents many supporting examples of why being generous is a damning reputation to have, being a prude who is not generous at all will lead to the Prince’s demise more quickly than one who is considered to be generous. Machiavelli also instructs Lorenzo how to keep control of his advisers: “The prince should think of the adviser in order to keep him good-honouring him, making him wealthy, putting him in his debt, giving him a share of the honours and the responsibilities” (345). This bribery of his close advisers would prevent them from ever rising up against Lorenzo, but such should not be necessary. A truly decent prince should choose advisers whom he can trust and look to when seeking advice without the fear of them stabbing him in the back during times of trouble. If Lorenzo were to listen to Machiavelli and bribe his advisers with power and wealth, the rest of the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli, in The Prince, claims that “it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one has to lack one of the two.” Trump chose fear, but he disregarded being loved as a component. The fear was accompanied with hate, leading to an unsuccessful attempt of Machiavelli’s thought within his current presidency. Machiavelli believed that “since men love at their convenience and fear at the convenience of the prince, a wise prince should found himself on what is his.” The people will not rise up against the prince if they fear him; he can control them in fear, not necessarily in love. Within Dr. Innes’s lecture on September 19, 2017, he discussed his interpretations of Machiavelli’s work. Two topics remain relevant to the discussion of Trump:…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In chapter eighteen, Machiavelli warns the Prince of the disadvantages of being compassionate: it leads to chaos . As it is a virtue, it means that the Prince would have to be compassionate with both criminals and ordinary people. Nonetheless, in order to ensure the security of the state, criminals have to be punished brutally but compassion prevents such punishment. Since Fortuna will inevitably bring him criminals he cannot deal with, the state will crumble. Thus, The Prince dissuades the adherence to virtues.…

    • 1667 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If he must choose one quality, M claims that the prince is better to be feared than loved, due to people’s human nature. Human nature, according to M, is unpredictable, selfish, and fearful; in other words, in times of danger, people will most likely to flee from danger and abandon their ruler. If the prince is loved, people, who do not have strong loyalty towards the prince, will turn their backs; however, if the prince is feared, loyal citizens will attempt to fight against the vicissitudes and protect their country and the prince. 6. In Chapter 18 Machiavelli discusses the need for a prince to have two natures: a fox and a lion.…

    • 944 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    By doing so, it make the characters seem more like real people that have opposing desires and may undergo some hesitation and doubt before acting upon a subject. Brutus is conflicted about the idea of turning against his friend and joining the conspiracy to kill Caesar or to not join and not be part of the slaughter of Caesar. Part of this issue is a result of Brutus being easily influenced and the certainty that Cassius is attentive to: “Who is so firm that cannot be seduced?” (I,ii,312). On the one hand, Brutus loves Caesar and clearly does not want to kill him, and enlist with the other members of the conspiracy to do such a duty. Brutus and caesar are friends and that is why it is difficult to join and kill him.…

    • 1701 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Being frivolous, indecisive, and effeminate will make him despised. All a prince's actions should show seriousness, strength, and decisiveness. The best defense against internal threats such as conspiracy is to be neither hated nor despised. If a conspirator thinks that killing the prince will enrage the people, he will think twice. Wise princes are careful not to antagonize the nobles and to keep the people happy.…

    • 1862 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    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. If the prince is loved and circumstances warrant, people are more prone to take advantage of the benevolence of their ruler. Ruling with an iron fist, Machiavelli believes, would ensure obedience from the ruled. Moreover, he does also warn of the dangers of using fear in a negative manner. Never in The Prince does Machiavelli advocate using cruelty for no explicit reason, but instead urges rulers to use it in the interests of the state.…

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli's The Prince

    • 400 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Machiavelli hence suggests that it is in the ruler’s best interest to set aside previous beliefs about politics and look at the truth. Through the process of seeking truth, Machiavelli is extremely aware of mankind's shortcomings (Prince, ch.17). Being aware of these failures enables him to see that in order to live a safe life one must embrace these flaws. Thus if someone acts in a “rotten” manner he will likely be feared rather than loved (Prince, ch.17). While being feared might seem unnecessary to some, Machiavelli goes on to note that being loved is a much more dangerous way of life because, love, is held by men who are “wicked”.…

    • 400 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The Cid And Cinna Analysis

    • 1465 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Yes, there were certain little parts from that part that seemed tyrannical, however they were not this vivid or extreme. Cinna continues to discuss their problems with tyranny when he states, “The outcome of our fight with tyranny Will bring us ignominy or renown.” He is arguing here that their attempt to stop tyranny will either humiliate them in doing so, or it will bring popularity to them and give a positive reputation for doing what they could to stop this. Again, much different from The Cid, because there was no attempt at stopping a tyrannical king. The king from The Cid did not have anyone accusing him of tyranny, much unlike Caesar. This was made pretty clear several times, as the main idea on each page was an argument being set forth to “wish to see Rome free…I wish to see Rome freed and take revenge.” and rid of the tyranny.…

    • 1465 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Another difference that I noticed in reading and comparing Machiavelli and Hobbes was seeing how they believe how a ruler or sovereign should act. Machiavelli in his book The Prince explains “It is better to be feared then loved” (Machiavelli 2006). He also shares how as a ruler, you should avoid hatred. Hatred gets one more power than just being loved, but people will not obey you if one is hated by all. So Machiavelli achieves this in a sneaky way.…

    • 208 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He also says that defense methods such as war or other methods that justify cruelty must be done. Machiavelli also believes that human nature is greedy and self-interested and that a leader needs to be feared and loved but mostly feared, because fear is consistent with self interest, and that a prince should attend to his own self interests and leaving people alone to keep the nation strong. But Plato's counterclaim to this would be that a ruler can never be just and it is not ok to harm others because that is contradictory to being just. That a ruler can not take actions to far. But because a “Philosopher King” is always seeking knowledge that knowledge would help decide the difference between just and unjust actions.…

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays