MACHIAVELLI's THE PRINCE Specifically, if the prince's army is brutish and cruel towards the citizens, the people will turn their resentment upon the prince, who is seen to tacitly condone the actions of his military.
Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince is one of the most controversial yet enduring political manifestos regarding the differing types of military affairs, principalities, and qualities of a great leader. The Prince has been referenced by academics, directors of corporations, and politicians for centuries, as it provides general, historically proven advice for principalities and republics on how to govern and maintain relations with their most important resource and the essential core of their power, i.e., individual citizens.
This paper is an ethical analysis of The Prince using the tobacco companies as an example. In Part I, the most critical, repulsive, and useful points of Machiavelli's The Prince will be analyzed and discussed. Part II examines the Machiavellian techniques the tobacco companies have employed in their business and reviews the effectiveness of such techniques. In Part III, the stakeholders the tobacco companies chose to placate or satisfy are discussed as well as the decision made by the tobacco companies to alienate one or more groups.
CRITICAL, REPULSIVE, AND USEFUL POINTS OF MACHIAVELLI's THE PRINCE
One of the most significant elements of Machiavelli's The Prince is his conception of the relationship between individual citizens and a political leader. According to Machiavelli, "it is essential for a prince to possess the good will and affections of his people, otherwise he will be utterly without support in times of adversity." (Chapter 9). Clearly Machiavelli believed that the implications of earning the hatred and ill will of citizens were far too dire for the political future of both the prince and the state. Additionally, of the two sources of attack that a prince must fear the most, one is conspiracy from within inspired by the hatred of the people. (Chapter 19). Likewise, the prince must be aware that the conduct of his intermediaries may and will directly reflect upon his own ...
While Machiavelli noted that it was essential for a prince to win the support of his citizens, he clearly did not intend for the prince to be benevolent and indulgent to the people. According to Machiavelli, "it is much more safe to be feared than loved, when you have to choose between the two." (Chapter 17). It was Machiavelli's belief that showing an excess of clemency towards individuals when they disobeyed legal, political, and societal norms would result in widespread crime, harming the entire society. Therefore, instilling cruel and severe punishment to those citizens who deserved it would secure the prince's empowerment, for none of his subjects would dare attempt to remove it from him. (Chapter 17). It is important to note that Machiavelli drew a clear distinction between being feared and hated, as illustrated by this quote: "A prince must make himself feared in such a manner that he shall at least not incur their hatred, for being the feared, and not hated, can go very well together." (Chapter 17).
Another crucial element in Machiavelli's vision of the ideal ruler involved the concept of general good governance, i.e., on how to rule. Machiavelli stressed that a great prince is one who is neither inaccessible nor invisible, yet his justice is obvious to those who are governed. According to Machiavelli, "the prince will avail himself of the occasion to secure himself, with less consideration for the people by punishing the guilty, watching the suspected, and strengthening himself at all the weak points of the province." (Chapter 3). In maintaining order in heterogeneous societies where more than one language is spoken and more than one religion is practiced, Machiavelli stated that the prince should "go and reside there which will make his possession there more secure and durable." (Chapter 3). Machiavelli believed that living among the citizens would enable a leader to foresee any problems and resolve them before they escalate into severe crisis or tension.
In terms of individual beliefs, Machiavelli suggested that a prince should not be overly liberal because it requires heavy taxation of the citizens to maintain the reputation of being liberal. Citizens will slowly come to disfavor and dislike the prince once they realize that in order to promote an egalitarian or liberal society, higher taxes must continually be imposed. However, if a prince is fiscally conservative, he will…
Specifically, if the prince's army is brutish and cruel towards the citizens, the people will turn their resentment upon the prince, who is seen to tacitly condone the actions of his military.
" Parallels with business takeovers are frighteningly stark. Change. In the Prince he says "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). Relevancy...and Not The impact of Machiavelli's writing on politics has been accepted for some time, but the relevance of his ideas to business had to wait until
Hence he advises that a prince should never rest from military thought. Especially in times of peace, a prince must engage in honing his skills and in studying military strategies. Relationship of the New Prince with the People Machiavelli realizes the importance of the new prince's relationship with the people and he has repeatedly emphasized its necessity in the Prince. Gaining Support of the People: When a new prince acquires a new
However, to interpret Machiavelli from this angle only would be to view his thoughts myopically. (Viroli, 1998) This is because the other piece of work that Machiavelli wrote at about the same time, the "Discourses on Livy" showed Machiavelli to be essentially a republican who perceived the state to be an autonomous and secular entity which depended upon mass support and human skills for its survival. According to a
Hitler was an aggressive, dominant leader who was revered by many Germans. He overtook Poland and other nations such as Norway with virtually no defense at all because they were unprepared and their leaders did not anticipate or approve of aggression and defense. They were wrong, and it cost them dearly. If these nations had put up a real fight, the war might have had a different outcome. The
It basically approves of just about any behavior as long as the company survives, and that is music to many people's ears. Machiavelli's advice has little to do with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." He writes as a man of science and logic, rather than a man of ethics and morality. Machiavelli felt a prince or leader stood above others, and so, was above
What is almost funny about this tactic is that Machiavelli notes the importance of specific circumstances throughout the chapter immediately before making generalized statements, but when it comes to actually judging the efficacy of fortresses, he refrains. However, this does not mean that he does not come up with a general pronounce, it just means that this general pronouncement takes the form of a discussion of the importance of specific