Upload
kathryn-ryan
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/13/2019 Machiavelli and the Shift Toward Modernity
1/5
Ryan
1
Kathryn Ryan
Dr. Atkins
Writing Assignment II
Machiavelli and the Shift Toward Modernity
I will argue in favor of Niccol Machiavellis view thatpolitical power does not
reside in virtue but, rather, in ones own capacity to maintain control and power over a
state. First, I will explain, using his own arguments in The Prince, Machiavellis belief
that one must sometimes act in ways inconsistent with moralistic virtue in order to
maintain and gain power. Thereafter, I will address a possible objection to said viewpoint
and respond to it, ultimately arguing in favor of Machiavellis assertion.
The Princeis a series of advisements that illustrate the modern shift toward
modernity and away from complete moral virtue. First, Machiavelli notes that conquering
rulers must inevitably injure those they conquer:
This in turn will be the result of another common and natural necessity, for by
the presence of his soldiers and by those other innumerable offenses that follow
upon conquest, a new ruler must inevitably distress those over whom heestablishes his rule (18).
He then advises conquerors to destroy previous ruling families, asserting that such must
be done if a ruler wishes to both conquer as well as hold his territory (19). Furthermore,
Machiavelli states that men must be either pampered or annihilated (20). In the event
that one must harm others, as a ruler wishing to maintain power, one must harm them so
severely that the harmed are unable to take revenge.
He presents The Princeas a guide on how to gain and maintain power. Machiavelli
advises the prince to act humanely only when doing so has an evident benefit, not
because doing so is ethical.
8/13/2019 Machiavelli and the Shift Toward Modernity
2/5
Ryan
2
It is quite possible that one may object to Machiavellis advisements, on the basis
of a more antiquated view that virtue is the core of good government. Such a view is
illustrated in Zhu XisReflections on Things at Hand:
If the ruler is humane, all will be humane. If the ruler is righteous, all will berighteous. Whether the world is peaceful or chaotic depends on whether the ruler
is humane or not. If he departs from humanity and becomes wrong, whatever
comes from his mind will be harmful to the government (Ch. 8, P. 215).
Therefore, one that supports the belief that virtuous leadership makes for virtuous
subjects and, ultimately, a secure rule, may disagree with Machiavellis advice in The
Prince.
While a reference to Zhu Xis teachings onvirtuous rule is valid, I believe that
Machiavelli is amply justified in his assertions. This is due, in large part, to human
nature. That a virtuous ruler will in turn produce virtuous subjects is inaccurate, for
human nature leads one to seek self-preservation over virtue. According to said nature,
one will act for the benefit of oneself, and therefore power cannot be maintained on the
basis of virtue alone. Machiavelli upholds the notion of self-preservation, noting, it is
truly a natural and ordinary thing to desire gain (23). He furthers thisby examining three
types of soldiers: mercenaries, auxiliaries, and citizens.
Mercenaries are paid soldiers, which poses a problem: They have no tie of
devotion, no motive for taking the field except their meager pay, and this is not enough to
make them willing to die for him (52). Soldiers that are unwilling to die for the good of
the state could easily be the source of aprinces downfall.The unwillingness of the
mercenaries to die for the state supports the modern notion of self-preservation.
Furthermore, Machiavelli mentions that mercenary captains are either good soldiers, or
8/13/2019 Machiavelli and the Shift Toward Modernity
3/5
Ryan
3
not. If they are not, they will fail at every task they are given. However, if they are
competent, they still cannot be trusted, for they will always seek to gain power for
themselves either by oppressing you, their master, or oppressing other against your
wishes (52). This flaw in the mercenaries is yet another affirmation of human self-
preservation, as the captain looks to gain power in order to satisfy his own selfish ends.
Auxiliaries are allied soldiers. If they lose, it is only ones own state that suffers.
But if they win, the prince and his state will become indebted to them (56). Such soldiers
will attempt to take the spoils of victory for themselves, yet again affirming the belief that
humans act in accordance with what is to their benefit.
Machiavelli concludes that a state is secure only if it possesses an army composed
of its own subjects, citizens, or dependents (58). For, in contrast to mercenaries and
auxiliaries, citizens of the state have motive for protecting their land. The idea of self-
preservation is further substantiated here, as it shows that only those that have true ties to
the land can be trusted to protect it. As protecting their homeland is to their own benefit
and the benefit of their loved ones, the citizens will courageously defend their state.
Moreover, Machiavellis view that one must sometimes stray from moralistic
virtue in order to gain and maintain power is justified in his explanations of the immoral
actions he advises. One such action is the murder of the previous ruling family upon
coming into power. While extinguishing the ruling family may be considered
inhumane, it will aid in securing the loyalty of the people, for it will destroy the
opportunity to remain loyal to the old rule. By destroying the family, there is less chance
of revolt, for there will not be an attempt to restore the previous rule (19).
8/13/2019 Machiavelli and the Shift Toward Modernity
4/5
Ryan
4
Similarly, the statement that men be either pampered or annihilated makes
sense in regard to seizing and holding power over a people. For, if a ruler were to leave
room for his subjects to avenge their losses, he is more likely to lose power than if he
were to follow Machiavellis advice, that necessary harm be done so severely that the
harmed cannot take revenge (20).
Machiavelli examines the best way to hold a state that was previously free,
concluding that they surest way to hold power in such a state is by complete political and
civil destruction (28). In republics there is greater vigor, greater hatred, greater desire
for revenge, and the memory of earlier freedom that will not rest (29). If the prince does
not devastate the state, there will always be the threat of rebellions in the spirit of the
former liberty, regardless of whether or not the prince is ruling well. Therefore, it is
advisable to simply destroy the state. Furthermore, when suppressing a revolt, a leader
can punish rebels as an example to others considering rebellion. Today, public executions
are considered inhumane, but Machiavelli asserts that public punishment of those that
revolt will discourage subsequent attempts at revolt and, therefore, strengthens ones
power and stabilizes ones rule (18).
Because man will seek self-preservation and act for ones own benefit as opposed
to in accordance with virtue, a ruler may only maintain power if they allow themselves to
be unconcerned with the ideal conditions of manner and behavior. Machiavelli's advice to
the prince is always grounded in the best way to acquire and increase power, rather than
in considerations of right or wrong.
Word Count: 1180
8/13/2019 Machiavelli and the Shift Toward Modernity
5/5
Ryan
5
Sources:
Machiavelli, Niccol, and Daniel John Donno. The Prince. New York: Bantam, 2003.Print.
Zhu, Xi. "On the Principles of Governing the State and Bringing Peace to theWorld."Reflections on Things at Hand; the Neo-Confucian Anthology.New York:Columbia UP, 1967. 215. Print.