How does Machiavelli reflect the values and idea of humanism and religion in The Prince - Research Paper Example

? Topic: How does Machiavelli reflect the values and idea of humanism and religion in “The Prince?” Order 536138 Topic: How does Machiavelli reflect the values and idea of humanism and religion in “The Prince?” Rarely do the kings and politicians get a clean certificate for their performances. Many consider it to be is true of Machiavellian approach also. But there is a section of thinkers that believe that he is the founder of republican thought and a strong votary of democratic power. The attributes of duplicity, cunning and bad faith in politics have been wrongly placed at his name. His thinking is subtle and has great democratic potential. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) was born in Florence. If the princes of the Machiavellian era were satanic, he cannot be blamed directly for their actions. The ‘Powerful Chairs’ (Kings, politicians, top bureaucrats etc) are always there to outsmart the ‘Chair--less Powers.’ (The common people) Machiavelli did advise the princes on how to hold on to power but he also advised the citizens seeking to maintain their liberty and how to go about it. He showed a new path for them and cautioned how his native Florence was getting engulfed in tyranny. He explained how ancient Rome preserved its freedom better, as the ordinary citizens there were more responsible and were able to checkmate the power of the elite. As a state employee Machiavelli led by example. His public life was spotless and free from corrupt practices. He was investigated for embezzlement and he came out with a clean slate and he was reimbursed the amount that was due to him. He would often say about him, “my poverty is evidence of my honesty”. Machiavelli articulated for a free city, where the citizens lived freely without any restrictions, without being absolutely controlled by a particular individual or group. A tyrant who emerges from within the political system is as dangerous for the country like the external invader. In the absence of constant vigil by the citizen body as a whole, and without their being organized properly, tyrannical individuals are bound to take over the reins of power. In essence, this proves the humanism in the approach of Machiavelli to the societal issues of his era. What a destructive weapon corruption is from the societal point of view, how adversely it affects the free-life—understand the advice of Machiavelli. In such a corrupt system, public interest is sacrificed at the altar of private or factional interests. Arbitrary interference does the maximum damage to the mass of people, according to him. The rulers must consider themselves to be the servants of public interest, not masters. Machiavelli is prophetic when he asserts that the resources of the elite combined with extensive discretion enjoyed by political office holders is the principal threat to the society and the nation. The expectations of the ordinary citizens are simple and straightforward. They are neither like power-hungry politicians nor like the ambitious elites. They have no desire for power to rule over others. At the same time, they have self-respect and essential dignity and do not desire to be dominated and would not like the arbitrary power to subjugate them. They are perpetually fearful of such societal developments. The sterling qualities of Machiavelli’s humanism are revealed in his opinion that the key to the resilience of Rome was its system and institutions—how they ensured the participation of ordinary citizens. They were the final guardians of freedom, not the grandi. He paid hearty compliments for the “tribunes of the plebs” (an institution of only the lower class) for exercising check and control over the power-grabbing craze of the grandi. Machiavelli goes a step further. The tribunes are vested with powers to frame charges against the members of the senate and indict them for corruption publicly and the private citizens will be punished accordingly if they try to exert pressure on the politics of the republic. That was a model system of punishment where common citizens were involved in the appellate process for dealing with political offences. Look what is happening today. Once the representatives are elected people have no other alternative but to bear with their excesses and undoing until they complete the term, which is generally 4-5 years. Machiavelli is a problem solver. He is the process provider. According to him the right process needs to be applied at the right time. Competition and selfish human beings will always be there trying to outsmart the other. Rules are neither good or bad, what matters is the application. What one does in the cause of people is important; but how one does, what one does is more important. His rules provide the strategy, appropriate to the situation prevailing in the society (Nation) at a given time. He mentions something that which is very important for a ruler. “For this is a general rule which never fails: that a prince who is not wise in his own right cannot be well advised unless by chance he has submitted himself to a single person who is wise.”(p.79) Most of the rulers used religion as a tool to further their own interests. For aggrandizement of wealth and to maintain their hold on the power they sidetracked religion and the established moral principles. Machiavelli walks on the razor’s edge while tendering his views on his approach. He states that successful war is the foundation on which all states are built. Rulers’ ruling without religion and morals doesn’t mean all the good governing principles are thrown aside to rule through violence and the power of the gun only. A good war has several consequential actions to follow. Fortification of the city and the territories won treatment of the subjects in the newly acquired territory, to check domestic insurrection etc. He doesn’t advocate mindless use of the military force. Domestic policies, international diplomacy, mastery of geography, understanding of history and its proper analysis, tactical strategy, all these assume importance and have a bearing on the administration of the state. The role of military assumes importance, in response to the conditions that prevailed in his era. Machiavelli concludes, “The Prince and the fear at the pleasure of the prince, a wise prince should build his foundation upon that which belongs to him, not upon that which belongs to others.”(p.58) The observation made in the introduction to the book speaks much about Machiavelli’s humanism and the importance he gives to religion. It reads thus: “Machiavelli is subtler than some moralists have appreciated. He never imagined that any sort of political action could be justified, and he clearly pronounces his awareness of conventional moral exigencies. He condemns politicians whose only aim is power, who kill their fellow citizens, betray their friends, and who are without faith, mercy or religion.”(Introduction, p. xiii) Machiavelli has a balanced approach to the issues concerning the rulers, how and how not the prince should rule. Hatred of the people is no good for him. Instead of being loved, he advocates that it is better for the prince to be feared. Practice of cruelty is fine in so far as it does not affect the long-term goodwill of the people. The goodwill of the people is the ultimate defense against foreign aggression and domestic insurrection and uprising. He cautions the prince against tough measures like confiscation of property or the winding up of the traditional institutions. Goodwill is a political instrument for stability. In the introduction, the observation made on morals and goodwill will clarify his stand: “…he recognizes the appeal of the system of moral values inherited from Christianity and from the tradition of natural law, even though he views this conventional morality as an impediment to the renaissance of the classical ideal of stable government.”(p.xiv) Some are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them writes William Shakespeare! Machiavelli expresses somewhat similar views when he opines, “…acquired either through ability of through fortune and are maintained without neither, they are sustained by the ancient institutions of religion…” (p.39)He adds the powerful influence of the religion and how it acts as the controlling force and becomes a handy instrument for the prince to rule. This mostly refers to the misuse of the religious injections by interpreting them as per the convenience of the prince and the determination to stick to the reins of power. Machiavelli provides the final piece of advice to the prince when he writes, “…..he should appear, upon seeing and hearing him, to be all mercy, all faithfulness, all integrity, all kindness, all religion…” (p.60) He also states that the prince should not be virtuous only for the sake of virtue. Virtues and vices are the tools for achieving the progress of the state, which is the prime obligation of the prince. Intrinsic moral value is less important as compared to the wellbeing of the state, to achieve which the prince should employ alternative hard options. Machiavelli opines, “And, therefore, a wise prince should think of method by which his citizens, at all times and in every circumstance will need the support of the state.”(p.36) He has a very careful role to play and treat every section of the people with the honor and justice they deserve. Machiavelli writes, “And well-organized states and princes have, with great diligence, taken care not to anger the nobles and satisfy the common people.”(p.63) Conclusion: Machiavelli is aware of the importance of a number of traits inherent in human nature. The practices of religious principles notwithstanding, people are governed by self-interest. Their trustworthiness cannot be taken for granted. In times of adversity, they may turn deceitful. Goodwill is never permanent; loyalties can switch depending on the circumstances. To substantiate his viewpoints, he gives examples from current social and political events and also from history. “It is noteworthy that Machiavelli, supposedly a hard-boiled realist, employs literary or mythical figures as his ideal model for the new prince.”(p.93) Notwithstanding his seemingly contradictory assertions on many issues, Machiavelli was an idealist, a humanist and understood the importance true religious principles necessary for the ruler, which have admirably been enunciated in the book Prince. References Machiavelli, Niccolo (Author), Bondanella, Peter (Editor, Translator), Musa, Mark (Translator); Niccolo Machiavelli: The Prince (Oxford World's Classics); Oxford University Press, USA, July 9, 1998 Read More