Everytime I
heard (or read) the word ‘Machiavellianism’, my mind would involuntarily relate
it with cunning aspects. That’s why I had a doubt while deciding to add The Prince into my reading list. But, I
was so curious about this book, and so I braced myself to pick it for my History Reading Challenge. I am glad I did it, because it turned out to be
interesting; it widened my perspective of state’s ruler and power.
Machiavelli
wrote The Prince to Lorenzo Di Medici
as a guidebook for a prudent prince to keep his state prosperous.
“…for in the same way that landscape painters station themselves in the valleys in order to draw mountains or high ground, and ascend an eminence in order to get a good view of the plains, so it is necessary to be a prince to know thoroughly the nature of the people, and one of the populace to know the nature of princes.”
Although
Machiavelli wrote especially of monarchy, most of his guides also benefit
modern republican states. I have made a diagram of monarchy models, how
to achieve and maintain it. But what I like most is his guides for being a
prince, or a ruler. Some of his ideas are too unconventional and even cynical,
that people put negative labels to Machiavelli. But I think we ought to
separate our ideal with the prosperity of a country or state. I believe that
stability is the key to prosperity, as without it, any rulers—competent though
he was—would have difficulty to do anything. So, I agree with Machiavelli, that
to be feared is more important for a ruler than to be loved; to be slightly miserly
is better than to be overly generous. Because people, who love you in better
times, could easily become your haters when things gone badly, and who
knows….what would happen then? Whereas if you are feared, you can put stability
over your state more easily, while at the same time you are trying to bring
prosperity to your people.
In conveying
his principles, Machiavelli seemed to be lack of consciences or morality. He
advised us to always be good, but must be able to do evil when necessary—to be
fox and lion at the same time. But, again, I think it is reasonable. To deal
with vast multitude in a country is not a simple task; stability is always the
key. Thanks to Machiavelli, now I understand these things; that seeking the
right ruler is far different from having an ideal patron. Here are more of his analysis.
The Prince
is not purely a history. Although Machiavelli used actual histories—mainly Italian
rulers, but also other European ones, and even Greek and Roman’s leader—this
book is more focusing on politics and power guide book and philosophy.
Machiavelli’s analysis is thorough and sharp, and his writing is brave and
blunt. But that makes this book more interesting…and classics!
Three and a
half stars for The Prince.
~~~~~~~~~~
I read the Signet Classics paperback edition
This book is counted
as:
3rd book for Back To The Classics 2014 (A Classic
by an Author Who Is New To You)
70th book for The Classics Club Project
17th book for WEM Self Project
No comments:
Post a Comment
What do you think?