" 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 the second half of the nineteenth century, when companies began to operate as large, complex organizations -- the equivalent in Machiavelli's terms of a move from tribal society to corporate state (Perseus Publishing Staff, asic ooks, Editors of Perseus Publishing). Most of these relevant concepts we have already discussed.

Though the Prince is much sought after as a manual for modern-day leadership and management, some of the 1500s tactics he espouses are, for the most part, not relevant today, at least….

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 few present-day analysts, this particular book unlike "The Prince" is a decent as well as useful book which can serve as a guide for leaders, followers, nation-builders as well as reformers of republics on the ways and means by which freedom can be preserved and corruption avoided. His subsequent piece of work, "The Art of War," which outlined the strategies of statecraft and warfare, served as a source of inspiration to later generations of military thinkers like von Clausewitz, Napoleon….

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 principality or adds territory to his existing rule, he often has to set up new, innovative methods of government. This creates many enemies for him among people who oppose change. On the other hand, according to Machiavelli, the supporters of change are usually passive because most people do not trust or support a government until it is firmly established. Hence, establishing a firm and stable government is a big challenge for a new prince before he can hope to gain….

This is again an idealistic notion of human nature, going back to imagining humans as permanently ridding themselves of their bad traits.
In regard to this Machiavelli acknowledges that being liberal, which is how he describes a ruler freely spending his country's resources, is a good quality to have. However he believes that this quality, if unregulated, could lead to a prince's ruin. If according to Machiavelli a prince were to spend a country's resources too excessively and begin heavily taxing his subjects as a result of that, he would risk losing their loyalty. Machiavelli recognized that in reality resources would always remain limited no matter how much of it is saved for future use. Thus this entailed that rulers would need to learn how to spend wisely and minimally. Machiavelli thus stated that being miserly with one's resources was better for rulers in that case, since then he would….

MACHIAVELLI's THE PRINCE
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….

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 same is true of the Holocaust. For the most part, most victims did not fight back, and offered little resistance as they were moved first to Jewish ghettos and then concentration camps. Had they risen up as a group and defended themselves, their fate might have been different as well.
Hitler was not a hero, or even a respected world leader, but those around him were weak, and that led to their downfall. A good leader is defensive, but also prudent,….

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 moral judgment, because his actions were always to maintain and control power for the good of the people, and they would always be seen as honorable, no matter what. How he maintained power really did not matter in Machiavelli's eyes. He writes, "Let a prince therefore act to conquer and to maintain the state; his methods will always be judged honourable and will be praised by all; for ordinary people are always deceived by appearances and by the outcome of….

Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli
In Defense of Tyranny: The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli

Niccolo Machiavelli, Italian historian, statesman, and philosopher of the Renaissance period, was known for his discourse, The Prince, published in the 16th century, for discussing his views on political leadership, particularly that of tyranny. In fact, The Prince is best described as a discourse on tyranny and authoritarian rule, and embodied through the Prince's personality, Machiavelli sets his standards on what kind of leader will benefit both the state and its people from threats against invasion from foreign rule.

This paper discusses two important aspects of Machiavelli's The Prince: (1) the characteristics of the Prince and the kind of society he will rule and (2) the permissiveness of tyranny in making society secure from foreign invasion/rule. Provided with these two important factors, this paper posits that Machiavelli's The Prince illustrates how tyranny can be functional (instead of detrimental) to….

Virtue translates to skill, ability, and ingenuity to Machiavelli, and so, it is quite understandable that his idea of virtue would share a stormy relationship with fortune.
The relationship between fortune and virtue in this work may seem to be convoluted at best, but in reality, the relationship makes perfect sense for the time. educed to its lowest level, the relationship is simply one between a strong and demanding man and a subservient woman. The man must never solely rely on the woman for his fate and fame. Instead, he must learn how to master fortune, and then mold it to his own will, and need. Thus, the relationship is volatile from the first, and will remain volatile as Machiavelli sees it. Fortune has no place in the planning of a political state, because fortune cannot be counted on. However, virtue, as Machiavelli defined it, has every place in a….

Prince
Published in the early sixteenth century, Nicolo Machiavelli's The Prince is a classic Early Renaissance-era work of political philosophy. Its tenets are still put into practice today by the world's top leaders, including the President of the United States. In The Prince, Machiavelli outlines the basic guidelines for effective leadership. In Chapters 15 through 18, Machiavelli especially focuses on specific leadership qualities and behaviors. Chapter Seventeen is especially notable for its advice against being too compassionate: it is better for a leader to be feared than to be loved, according to Machiavellian ideals. What makes The Prince a quintessential early Renaissance text is its focus on the pragmatic qualities of human leaders, rather than on the divine or moral qualities they should ideally exhibit. This was a radical shift in political philosophy, which was largely based on Church law before that.

Chapter Seventeen of The Prince is entitled "Cruelty and Mercy:….

However, it was after his imprisonment that Machiavelli showed 'Machiavellian' traits, as he tried to pursue his political philosophy by gaining his once-deferred power by the Medici family. Machiavelli shows his Machiavellianism by devising ways to win their favor once again, and these ways include creating discourses that reflect the family's method of governing Italy. By reflecting through the image of the Medici family the image of resolute and wise leaders, he shows that he has the ability to win others' favor through "clever trickery" -- that is, by making the Medici family believe that he is an avid follower of their administration, and eventually, win their trust. However, Machiavelli had failed to receive the desired results of his philosophies, but the strategies he adopted to achieve the reforms he wanted to introduce in Italy was nevertheless successful, at least through his truly Machiavellian writings and discourses..

Machiavelli, Thomas More, Thomas Hobbes
Under what circumstances is it just (or right, or ethical) to go to war? Why? Compare and contrast how Machiavelli, Thomas More, and Thomas Hobbes might answer this question.

Because of the rather negative perception of Niccolo Machiavelli's theories of political survival and expediency at all costs, one might be tempted to assume that the Italian political theorist believed that the ideal leader, The Prince, should go to war at any opportunity to demonstrate his strength as a leader. However, Machiavelli was not nearly so bloodthirsty or foolish. In fact, Machiavelli believed in self-promotion and the promotion of the existence of the Prince's political future and the state at all costs. War occasionally might serve as a means to this end but only should be undertaken in extreme circumstances. For instance, in discussing a specific political situation that plagued Italy at the time, he noted, that war….

In Chapter 25 of the Prince, Machiavelli addresses the topic of fortune and its effect on rulers and their states. Machiavelli makes two main statements about fortune. First, the author claims that the good leader transcends fortune's vicissitudes. Free will, notes Machiavelli, trumps luck. Second, Machiavelli urges rulers to control and command fortune.

Fortune is female in the Prince for two reasons. One, females are associated with nature, and Machiavelli uses a metaphor from the natural world to describe fortune as a raging river: "which when in flood overflows the plains, sweeping away trees and buildings, bearing away the soil from place to place; everything flies before it, all yield to its violence, without being able in any way to withstand it," (Chapter 25). Two, fortune is female because men can control it using brute force. Females and fortune are depicted as wild, natural, and untamed. ulers are by default male….

Republicans recently overtook Democrats in fundraising, for instance, yet they will continue to play the underdog on most issues because the "good" qualities of security and being disadvantaged (which is generally viewed favorably in the country) are mutually exclusive, and because the appearance of being the underdog helps their cause regardless of its truth.

This also reflects a singularity of purpose and a determination that one's own conclusions, and not those derived from the advice of others, should be the guiding principles of leadership.

Political parties and leaders still tend to use this singularity while attempting to appear as populist leaders; the former allows for strength and true achievement, while the latter allows for the support of the people. Both are necessary, but they cannot be held at the same time. Machiavelli understood this, but this doesn't make him evil.

Conclusion

The Prince cannot be good or bad on its own. Like any of….

Prince by Machiavelli [...] what Machiavelli believes are the qualities of the best rulers and of the best states. It will also look at the questions: Why does he support these qualities? Why do they need to have such qualities? Do you think he's right? If so, pick a good ruler and show that he (or she) has these qualities. If you don't agree, choose a counterexample and do the same. Machiavelli's work "The Prince" illustrates how power and those who wield it have not changed throughout the centuries. Power has always corrupted, and those who wield it tend to be those most easily corruptible. This is easily evident in the modern conflict between the United States and Iraq. Each state believes the other is corrupt and led by a corrupted and corruptible leader, capable of using deadly force against its enemies. These problems seem to have plagued nation-states….