Machiavelli Essay, Research Paper

Machiavelli

The Morphing of Machiavellian Ideas In the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries the common people relied on the princes of the twenty-four hours for protection. These princes, hence, exercised absolute power over their province. They had a responsibility to protect the people and their land, and a self-preserving inherent aptitude to protect, and cultivate, their ain power. However, modern democratic signifiers of authorities have taken the load of protecting people and set down off of the prince and set it on the people, whether in the signifier of a true democracy or a representative authorities, such as The United States enjoys. But still staying is the self-preserving inherent aptitude of the prince, or politician. To the princes seeking to acquire and maintain power in the oppressive establishments of Machiavelli & # 8217 ; s twenty-four hours, his advice may hold been advantageous ; nevertheless, to modern authorities, his advice is more applicable to the interrelatednesss between politician and politician, and less toward politician and common people. Interrelations between politicians in modern authorities can sometimes acquire complicated. When dialogues between two major leaders break down the consequence can be war, even in modern authorities where the determination whether or non to travel to war is mostly decided by the people or their elective representatives. Machiavelli says that & # 8220 ; a prince must non hold any other object nor any other idea, nor must he take anything as his profession but war & # 8221 ; ( 35 ) , nevertheless, this has no topographic point in modern authorities. For case, in America, the president is non allowed to declare war without the consent of Congress. This is non to state that he should non be concerned with national security, but that this must non be his chief avenue of concern. Furthermore, a modern leader need non be wholly consumed with the schemes of war, he is allowed, and afforded by the people, certain advisers to council him in these determinations. A modern leader, hence, needs to be concerned more about the political branchings of war. Such as when America entered into Desert Storm under President Bush. President Bush allowed the military leaders

to decide the course of military action, for the most part, while he met and worked out differences with leaders from other countries in attempts to keep peace with countries outside of Saudi Arabia. In times of war, soldiers must never trust the enemy, and must also, if necessary, deceive those around them to attain a goal he or she believes to be cause-worthy. The same is true in the interrelations of politicians in today’s modern government. The political campaign field can be thought of as one of battle. The opposing forces are made up of political parties, or even opposing politicians of the same party, facing one another in a campaign or debate. Machiavelli says that ” the princes who have accomplished great deeds are those who have cared little for keeping their promises and who have known how to manipulate the minds of men by shrewdness ” (43). To understand the application of this theory into modern government, the separate political parties must be viewed as a single politician. The modern politician, whether it be morally right or wrong, must, in essence, lie to achieve office. These lies are called “campaign promises” in political lingo. Campaign promises have been abandoned so often that the common people do not expect them to be kept. These promises are made because of the self-preserving instinct of the politicians. For example, President Bush is now remembered for the words: “read my lips no new taxes .” However, taxes were raised and another “campaign promise” was broken. The political parties make similar promises to the people to gain support, and those promises are just as likely to be abandoned without a second thought. The interpretation ideas of Machiavelli have, indeed, morphed with the change in governmental structure. Some of his ideas have fallen to the wayside, while some live on as reasonable strategies for any leader. As modern government grows, and the interrelation of politicians becomes more complex, Machiavelli’s ideas will change over and over. However, the decision to have a Machiavellian government or not, now rests more largely in the hands of common people, an idea Machiavellian could not have understood.