Niccolo Machiavelli - Essay Example

119727 Born in Italy, in 1469, Niccolo Machiavelli, after going through many hurdles and problems in life, eventually became dedicated to patriotism and politics and political philosophy, and even to this day, remains one of the best theorists of political science world and is considered to be the political genius of all times. One of the greatest original thinkers, brilliant perhaps slightly tragic, Machiavelli looms large over the political philosophy scene across centuries. His period was of worst political and religious instability. He was influenced by Savanarola and his eventual execution affected him severely. He was an active politician in the independent city-state of Florence. After working in the government and diplomatic positions for a while, he was influenced by the Prince of Papal states, Cesare Borgia, under whom Machiavelli hoped to unite Italy. But this dream had to be abandoned when Medici came to power and he was dismissed from office. As an unemployed person, he soon started writing. "The Prince" was written mainly to please the Medicis, but it made him further unpopular with them. His real thoughts were mirrored in Discourses on Livy that explains his complete political philosophy even though the marred legacy of The Prince haunted him beyond the grave. "Machiavelli was the first to discuss politics and social phenomena in their own terms without recourse to ethics or jurisprudence" http://www.wsu.edu/dee/REN/MACHIAV.HTM The Prince argues that any kind of ruthless, unethical, immoral ways could be exercised to gain the principality and to rule it with an iron hand effectively and successfully. He disregarded all conventionally moral and accepted ways of attaining and ruling a country in favor of establishing and retaining a powerful authoritarian state, whatever the means could be. He reiterates that the vitality, power, strength, intuition, cleverness of the lone, all-powerful figure of the Prince is the only factor that matters in the administration of any principality. The Discourses on Livy is an impressive review of Roman Republic with transparent admiration for the republican Government. "Here, too, however, Machiavelli's conception of the proper application of morality to practical political life is one that judges the skill of all participants in terms of the efficacy with which they achieve noble ends" http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/macv.htm Machiavelli's principles could be effectively applied to today's governing of large organizations, sometimes, in these days of globalization, even across the boundaries of nations. In a hypothetical large organization, the distribution and exercise of power is as critical as that of a State. Any organization, as in State, secrecy and confidentiality are absolutely necessary for any action to be effective. Organizations, plagued with informers, whose future actions could be forestalled by competitors, could never be successful. "No enterprise is more likely to succeed than one concealed from the enemy until it is ripe for execution," Machiavelli from The Art of War, http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/96may/machiavelli.html Machivelli talks about a monarchical rule and a powerful ruler at its helm. The policies recommended by him would go a long way in discouraging mass political activism, or democracy. He did not recommend a totally despotic rule, but a benevolent rule with a firm hand, but with considerable individual rights. He also recommended that monarch can use his power in a judicious way without disturbing the private traditional lives of his people, actually keeping in mind that he is responsible for their material prosperity. He was a political thinker and did not think that politics of the state should be governed by moral or religious absolutism, and the ruler, under difficult circumstances, might not be held responsible, even if he takes actions infringing the private rights of citizens, as those actions might be necessary for the state. These principles in a smaller way, apply to organizations. The highest authority need not be a real despot, but should wield immense authority to make a success of the organization. If he hesitates to get information, even by unethical means, he would fail to understand what exactly is happening in the organization, and will remain away from truth. If occasion arises to be slightly unethical and unkind towards the staff members, who have to be controlled, according to Machiavellian principles, it cannot be held against the supreme authority. In those days, Italy was not united and intense political struggle was going on between the City-States of Venice, Naples, Milan and Florence and of course the Papal state. It has also extended to France, Spain and Holy Roman Empire. There were spies all over, violence, torture, and in those times, even though Italian unity looked like a distant dream, Machiavelli called for unity of Italy and a complete stopping of foreign intervention and this should apply to any organization that has to unite against the competitors, takeovers and margining bids, which could not be beneficial. Some of his assumptions are questioned recently. ""Now concerning Machiavelli's pronouncement that it is very difficult for a prince to be both feared and loved at the same, this is entirely erroneous, for there is nothing easier for a prince than to obtain them both, as sound reason will attest," says Jenson (1960, p.2). It is also said that political power is a function centered on belief. "Belief, then, not knowledge is central to political behavior and hence the world of politics does not recognize the classical distinction between appearance and reality," Fleisher (1972, p.134). He gave great importance to calculation of the ruler in cleverly maneuvering the affairs of the state. He implied that the ruler should receive regular information from diverse sources and use his own judgments on the course of action that has to be adapted and this is exactly what is needed by the head of the organization that he should keep himself well informed of every move and get enough intimation of the happenings. "For Machiavelli, politics was about one and only one thing: getting and keeping power or authority. Everything else-religion, morality, etc-that people associate with politics has nothing to do with this fundamental aspect of politics The only skill that counts in getting and maintaining power is calculation;" http://www.wsu.edu/dee/REN/MACHIAV.HTM He tried to apply scientific methods of Aristotle and Averroes to politics and perhaps the first Western thinker to do so. The Prince projects dark times, almost impossible intrigues, horrifying tragedies, and monstrously volatile circumstances. In this unpredictable social and political world of calculations and miscalculations, Machiavelli makes it clear that all the authority of the ruler could vanish into thin air, if the ruler makes one single miscalculated move and the mind of the Prince should be the greatest in the world, something akin to Alexander's in warfare. He argued that morality should not apply to finding, enhancement and retaining absolute power over the monarchy. The ruler was told: "it's good to be true to your word, but you should lie whenever it advances your power or security-not only that, it's necessary." (Ibid). Machivelli's praise is only for the winners and his admiration goes to Alexander VI and Julius II, perhaps the most irreligious of all Popes, but he finds them unparalleled in their military and political endeavors. During renaissance, he was considered to be an Anti-Christ for his unethical approach to politics. He always showed that he spoke about the state in surgical and medical terms, but not in ethical or moral terms ("seditious people should be amputated before they infect the whole state"). He was genuinely concerned about the advancement of state, especially that of Italy, at a time when the situation looks almost desperate and the State of Florentine was going through grim hopelessness. He talks about the manly virtue, an invincible power, strength and ability of the ruler, on account of which he should be able to impose his will on society, with the aid of brilliant and unerring calculations, and he should grab and plunder the fortune ("Fortune is a Lady") and this passage continues to remain outrageous even to this day, which is also considered to a Renaissance idea of a powerful person imposing his will on entire society with gratifying results of eliminating chaos and uncertainty. "But since virtue also meant human exertion against chance, it becomes importantly tied up with freedom of will and so with a humanist conception of the universe in which there is no cosmic plan or divine purpose," says Kocis (1998, p.53). "I have composed a little work on principalities; there I plunge as deeply as I can into this subject, discussing what a principality is, what kinds there are, how they are acquired; how they are maintained, why they are lost," http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/philosophers/machaivelli.html Here we can think of another political thinker and Leviathan, and his statement of political philosophy, where he says that humans, by nature, are greedy, materialistic and quarrelsome and are doomed to chaos and perpetual war and to escape this fate, they need a commonwealth, that could be created by surrendering most of the individual rights to the highest authority, and even an authoritarian state power is better than total anarchy and a 'perpetual state of war, man against man'. Another political philosopher is Locke, a British philosopher, and much of his work is characterized by opposition to authoritarianism, and said that the legitimate and illegitimate functions of the states should be segregated. He wanted individuals to reason the public authority, instead of blindly accepting them. In a way, he follows natural law and the divine power of man. In his Essay Concerning Human Understanding, he advocates to apply the human logic into rationalize the authoritarian powers and understand authorities of Government and Church. Weber, a German political thinker, whose main work deals with rationalization of religion, government and society, argues defines the state thus: "as an entity which possesses a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force, a definition that became pivotal to the study of modern Western political science" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber Of all these philosophers, perhaps for an authoritarian organization that also worries about its people Machievelli comes the closest in his philosophy. He had an uncanny ability of discerning human nature. "The ability to see things from the perspective of either the common people or the prince thus permits Machiavelli to understand human nature in more general way than either," Masters (1996, p.54). Power and distribution of power in the organization mainly depends on the central authority of that organization. If the central figure is despotic like that of Machiavelli, there will not be much distribution of power as every power and authority will be centered on the central figure himself. Distribution of power would be minimal, as Machiavelli's prince, here, the topmost person of an organization is not comfortable with much distribution of power. Applied this principle, the organization will run under authoritarian lines, without much distribution of power to any of the hierarchy, which would be working under the central control, without knowing what the next move of the central authority could be. At the same time, it is a sure way to progressive success, as far as the central figure does not make any miscalculation in his moves. Thinkers of Machiavelli's caliber never go out of relevance. They could be applied to any circumstances in any age. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. Fleisher, Martin (1975), Machiavelli and the nature of Political Thought, Groom Helm, London. 2. Jensen, De Lamar (1960), Machiavelli, Cynic, Patriot, or Political Scientist D.C. Heath and Company, Boston. 3. Jocis, Robert A. (1998), Machiavelli Redeemed, Associated University Presses, London. 4. Masters, Roger D. (1996), Machiavelli, Leonardo and the Science of Power, University of Notre Dame Press. 5. Prezzolini, Giaseppe (1967), Machiavelli, Robvert Hale Limited, London. ONLINE SOURCES: 1. http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/macv.htm 2. http://www.wsu.edu/dee/REN/MACHIAV.HTM 3. http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/philosophers/machaivelli.html 4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber Read More