The Characteristics of a Good Leader according to Niccolo Machiavelli - Essay Example

The Characteristics of a Good Leader, According to Niccolo Machiavelli Introduction The Little Book as Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince” is popularly called is all about political power – its acquisition, maintenance and use. To make good at such acquisition, maintenance and use of power, common wisdom dictates that leaders must possess the qualities by which men are adjudged good: merciful, faithful, humane, religious, morally upright and honest, peace-loving, liberal-minded and generous. This seems to be not the case, however, as shown by countless leaders who fell from grace although they exhibit the characteristics so described. This paper attempts to explain why and in the process discusses the qualities and characteristics that make a good leader, based on the views of Machiavelli, which seem to do violence on the popular concept of leadership. Practical Leadership According to Machiavelli, good intentions, strong moral convictions and even technical expertise do not guarantee success in the political and administrative arena (Dobel, 1998). “The man who wants to act virtuously in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous.” A man from the common people may aspire for the highest post, and he can do alone or with the help of others. If he becomes a leader through his wealth rather than through popularity or force of arms, he is still said to have become a leader with the help of others. The reason is that the people will look not to him but to his wealth as the source of his power. The people’s attitude will be based not on the strength of his character or the wisdom of his acts but on the state of his finances. Machiavelli counts liberality and generosity as among the various qualities it is desirable to see in a leader, but “the reputation for liberality or generosity is better than the practice thereof.” In other words, one does not need to be liberal or generous throughout. The important thing is he acquires a reputation for these predilections without going overboard. The danger with a thoroughly liberal disposition, according to Machiavelli, is that this is likely to “consume his whole substance in things of this sort… and be obliged, to maintain his reputation for liberality, to burden his subjects with extraordinary taxes and to resort to confiscations and all the other shifts whereby money is raised.” By consuming the means for practicing liberality and generosity, these dispositions lead to a reputation for the opposite. In general, leaders are better off if they are loved rather than feared by their constituents. Machiavelli, however, sees some advantage in being feared more than loved although not to the extent that the leader will be hated or despised by his subjects. To explain, Machiavelli points out that men are generally thankless, fickle, false and greedy such that they would show love and devotion while they benefit from a leader but once they see no use from this leader, he will promptly turn their backs against him. “For love is held by the tie of obligation which, because men are a sorry breed, is broken on every whisper of private interest.” If a leader is feared, on the other hand, few of his subjects will stab him in the back because “fear is bound by the apprehension of punishment, which never relaxes.” Nonetheless, Machiavelli counsels leaders to exert efforts to be loved by their subjects if only to foil conspiracies against them. The success of a conspiracy against a leader, or even the decision to make one, depends on how the conspirators believe the people will greet the news of the fall of their sovereign. If a leader is loved by his people, the conspirators are expected to meet resistance from the loyal subjects. If he is hated, they will be rewarded by them. Like all men, leaders should attend to their self-preservation and personal interest, which runs counter to the popular notion that those who aspire to lead must put their own welfare behind public interest. Thinking of the public good at all times is advisable if people are all honest and true, but this is not so. Therefore, a leader “neither can nor ought to keep his word when to keep it is hurtful to him and the causes which led him to pledge it are removed.” Leaders are loved and respected by their subjects if they exhibit the qualities by which men are accounted good: merciful, faithful, humane, religious and upright. In the view of Machiavelli, however, leaders are more effective if they “seem to have” rather than actually possess these qualities. This means that it is all right to be a hypocrite. The important thing is to strive always to obtain results, for leaders are judged not by actions but by results. “For the vulgar are always taken by appearances and by results, and the world is made up of the vulgar, the few only finding room when the many have no longer ground to stand on.” Another important measure of a good leader in the Machiavillian viewpoint is the quality of people that he appoints to key positions in his government, which reflects on his own qualities. Whether these officers are good or bad depends on the leader’s prudence, “so that the readiest conjecture we form of the character and sagacity of a leader is from seeing what sort of men he has around him.” Thus, if the ministers or cabinet officials are capable and faithful, we may count the leader wise since he recognized their merit and retained their fidelity. “But if they be otherwise, we must pronounce unfavorably of him, since he has committed a first fault in making this selection.” The deposed Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke could not keep power for long because he failed to follow Machiavelli’s suggestions for leadership success (Bateman, 2003). In addition to admitted problems on alcohol and marital infidelity, Hawke also did not project himself as a dominant leader and omitted to establish advantageous relationships with both the public and the members of his own party. The hallmark of a good leader is the capacity to foresee and address political problems early, and Hawke was found wanting in this respect. An effective leader will sometimes, perhaps most of the time, act in an unchristian fashion or do evil things, but always for good ends (Chisholm, online). Thus, Machiavelli actually advocates war, believing that a good war now and then keeps the body politic healthy and trim. He is not a panegyrist of violence, but just happens to believe that in a world full of malice, any means, with a heavy reliance on the bad, may be used to accomplish our ends. Machiavelli cites the example of Cesare Borgia in the days of the Roman empire, whose armies pillaged and burned and killed but brought order, unity and security for a time to a disunited people. Political figures associated with Machiavellism include former British Prime Minister Margaret Thacher, General Francissimo Franco and Henry Kissinger. Because of their Machiavellian attributes, Thatcher was known as the Iron Lady in her time, Franco became the world’s longest ruling head of state, and Kissinger took international diplomacy to unprecedented levels. It is said that Fidel Castro included “The Prince” among the books he took with him to the mountains when he fled the ruthless regime of Batista, which may have instilled in him the practical attitude toward human affairs. Conclusion The quality most desirable to find in leaders is the ability to always keep up a good front or a good public image. This means that he can cheat and be corrupt but always on the sly so as not to harm that image. There are in fact many dubious acts that a leader may indulge in without the public knowing about them or censuring him for them. He may, for example, swindle the wealthy few. So long as he does not harm the property and honor of average men, he will always be held in high esteem and great affection by his subjects. References 1. Bateman, J. (2003). “Ignoring Machiavelli’s Advice: The Case of Bob Hawke.” University of Queensland, Australia. 2. Chisholm, R. “The Ferocious Morality of Niccolo Machiavelli.” Available online at: www.iea.usp.br/english/articles. 3. Dobel, J.P. (1998). “Political Prudence and the Ethics of Leadership.” Public Administration Review, January/February 1998, Vol. 58, No. 1. 4. Morris, D. (1999). “The New Prince: Machiavelli Updated for the 20th Century.” Los Angeles: Renaissance. Read More