“All well-governed states and all intelligent princes were careful not to reduce the nobles to despair, nor the people to a state of dissatisfaction.”
You've probably heard this phrase somewhere, if you haven't, stay with us because today we're going to answer questions like: who was Machiavelli? What was the political scenario in which he wrote "The Prince"? What are the ethics behind this book? Why did his name become associated with perversity and lack of scruples? What are your central ideas?
Did you know that the phrase "the ends justify the means" does not exist in any of the works of our great Niccolo Machiavelli? And that this phrase, in fact, is just a definition of the work said by scholars of his work over the centuries?
Are you curious to understand everything about this irreverent politician? Do you want to rock conversations about politics or the Enem essay? So stay with us. Leave a like to help the channel and because reading Machiavelli will be much easier from now on.
Before we begin, understand that Machiavelli was not the first to have the ideas written in his book The Prince. In fact, Machiavelli was already inserted in the context of the movement cultural, economic and political, emerged in Italy in the 14th century, known as the Renaissance.
The region of Italy at this time was the political and artistic center of Europe, thereforethe stage, the exhibition of ideas, greatly favored avant-garde thinking and the study of Machiavelli's work throughout the history.
Understand that Machiavelli is a man of his time and should not be read separately from 15th Century Florence, this is noticeable when there are facts described in the book that are practically a clipping of a journalistic article experienced by the writer, as many of these events mentioned there are no other historical records.
Niccolo Machiavelli had considerable prestige in the Republic of Florence.However, although he served as a civil servant during the Republic of Florence, his political beliefs are more complex than a simple claim that he was a republican.
Here, Machiavelli conveys the idea that the form does not matter, the important thing is order and collective security, that is, the result achieved by the astute Ruler. Therefore, his ideas seem to recognize the need for monarchical and autocratic governments in certain contexts. Obviously, because at the time this was a reality of politics and the formation of the State.
However, it was his proximity to the Republic that placed him in a delicate political position vis-à-vis the Medici Monarchy at the time.
In August 1512, due to the Spanish invasion of the republic's territory, the population deposed Sonderini and welcomed the Medici, who made a brilliant and elaborate political move. Machiavelli was dismissed on November 7, due to his connection to the republican government, withdrawing from public life.
In 1513, he became suspected of involvement in a conspiracy against the new government, was arrested, tortured and exiled. This led him to write his most recognized work in a few weeks, practically a bible for politicians and businesspeople around the world: "The Prince".
Interestingly, Machiavelli wrote essays, speeches and short stories, such as "Reports on facts in Germany", "Portrait of things in France" and "Discourses on the first decade of Titus Livy". Mandragora, however, none of them were as widely read as his more uncompromising writing in terms of engagement.
According to historian Renato Janine Ribeiro, after being arrested, tortured and exiled, during his banishment, Machiavelli, between gambling and country life, wrote "The Prince", a book based on studies about leaders of his time and their experiences as employees in Florence.
In a letter to a friend, Machiavelli made it clear that, as he could not discuss politics as in a Republic, he would rather be involved in politics, even in the Monarchy, than not be able to do it.
Coincidentally, although Machiavelli dedicated the book toLorenzo II de Medici, there is no mention or exemplification related to to the Medici.
Throughout "The Prince", Machiavelli mentions several historical figures as examples to illustrate his points. One of the figures he mentions is Caesar Borgia, also known as Duke Valentinus. Caesar Borgia was the son of Pope Alexander VI and was a political and military leader during the Italian Renaissance.
Machiavelli uses César Borgia as an example to discuss the importance of virtù and fortune in politics. He describes César Borgia as a leader who used both military force and political cunning to gain power, having failed much more due to lack of luck than due to competence. Caesar Borgia is portrayed as a prince who was successful in his political endeavors despite adverse circumstances.
However, it is important to note that Machiavelli also highlights Caesar Borgia's limitations as a ruler. He mentions that despite his political and military skills, Caesar Borgia was unable to consolidate his power in the long term and was eventually defeated by the misfortune of his early illness. This serves to illustrate the volatile nature of fortune and the need for a ruler to adapt to changing circumstances.
It is important to highlight that Machiavelli, although he showed some admiration for César Borgia, was not necessarily endorsing his actions, but rather using him as a historical example to illustrate his arguments about politics and the exercise of power.
But it looks strange, don't you think? Although there is no historical proof, doesn't it give the impression that Machiavelli dedicated his work as a peace offering? How about a request to return to the government of Florence with the approval of the Medici family?
Comment your opinion in the comments.
This possible attitude of Machiavelli, in seeking reconciliation, which for us, the mere governed, reflects an immense lack of character and values, for him, according to his own definition, reflected the example of what he conceptualized as "virtù".
Before we continue, I will briefly present the concepts of three important keys to understanding Machiavelli's ideas: Virtù, Fortune and Prudence. We will explain more about them. Continue with the video, enjoy and subscribe to the channel to be part of our community of intrepid people in search of knowledge.
Virtù, present in Machiavelli's work, refers, roughly speaking, to the individual's ability to act in the face of adversity, to their ability to win, talent, to anticipate problems and the enemy's actions and emerge victorious. This concept should not be confused with the Christian or Platonic idea of virtues, such as compassion, honor, justice, empathy, among others.
For Machiavelli, "virtù" is the ability to deal with fortune. Fortune would be the events around us, which bring opportunities or misfortunes. We realize that fortune can bring both good events and bad events.
Prudence, in turn, refers to the ability to manipulate events in your favor. It goes beyond remaining diligent and fearful. It is not to be confused with the common definition that we are used to. Being prudent means understanding the context you are in, the ins and outs of the political game, the traps that may exist and knowing how to prepare for them without being defeated.
However, I don't want you to get confused - Machiavelli does not advise that a leader be malicious, immoral or intolerant, on the contrary, he also discussed the need for a ruler to act in accordance with morality when possible, without compromising the security and stability of his government . The objective of a prince's actions is not only to maintain his power, but to deal with political factors such as people, financial strength, political titles, economy, external relations, in other words, knowing how to balance the forces of power to guarantee a strong society in the political-economic aspects of its people and orderliness.
For example, if you watch the movie "The Godfather", you will realize that Don Corleone perfectly fits Machiavelli's definition of virtù, fortune and prudence. Your virtù would be the ability to build security over the years in your business, to manipulate allies and enemies, to know your limits and the force you should use. Fortune would be all the events that led him to the top, many of which were misfortunes, such as the death of his father, mother and brother, in addition to his life as an orphan in a foreign land. Still, he managed to play the game and earn love, respect and fear. Prudence would be Don Corleone's negotiating capacity, his political and decision-making skills, which have provided him with security and respect over so many years. He did what was necessary, and the people around him did not know exactly what he did, but they accepted the results, considering Don Corleone an honorable and successful man in life, worthy of respect and fear.
At this point, you must be thinking that Machiavelli is an unscrupulous, unprincipled and moral individual. And I don't blame him for that, many videos and superficial interpretations attribute all types of manipulation, cunning, deception and betrayal to Machiavelli. However, my dear listener, from now on you will not be one of those people, as your view of the work "The Prince" and "Mandragora" will change.
Machiavelli did not write a manual for monarchs to remain in power, nor for them to be cold, distant, treacherous and cruel towards the people. On the contrary, he wrote a work based on kings and rulers who were loved, respected and feared by their people, and who managed to maintain their kingdoms for long periods, summarizing their mistakes and successes.
Machiavelli summarizes everything that has worked until then in politics, not a fanciful summary preached by the Catholic Church and its virtues, not even by the Platonic teachings of the Greeks and Romans, which portray what we call "ought-to-be", what we idealize should be to be. Machiavelli writes directly and crudely about realityseeking to understand politics as it really was, recognizing the complexities and challenges of exercising power.
In his works, there is no defense of evil, on the contrary, he advises that in politics everything is complex and dynamic. A ruler cannot afford to act within the same ethics as his subjects. He must do what is necessary so that the people respect and fear him. If it is not possible to have love and fear, it is better to be feared than loved. For maintaining compassion involves giving in more and more to the desires for benevolence demanded by someone, which makes one the target of deceivers and opportunists, and prevents the correct judgment of dangers. In the power game, allies lie and are more dangerous than enemies, because we never know what to expect from our allies.
Allies and enemies have something in common: they all want to be in your place. If you don't think ahead of them, you don't deserve to govern. A weak leader brings more tragedies than benefits to the people, and the people don't care what their prince does behind the scenes as long as they feel safe and prosperous. The people want results.
Therefore, Machiavelli states that a prince must maintain the appearance that he possesses all the virtues desired by his subjects, even if he does not have them. You must show the entire kingdom that you have them. And when he is not in front of the people, he must be relentless to achieve his objectives for the best for his kingdom. This can mean breaking promises, lying, usurping, and taking unpopular actions. Because the scenario is always changing, and an inflexible ruler is doomed to failure.
In short, we as citizens obey laws out of fear of institutions of social control, out of fear of being arrested, out of shame of what our families and friends would think, out of fear of committing sins, or out of social morality. The prince is not subject to this. There is no one above him. A sovereign country is sovereign by itself and by the capacity of its armies. To maintain his sovereignty, he must play a different game, a game in which no one will tell the truth about his real intentions, a game of lies and opportunism, which requires prudence and cold blood.
Do you notice the difference?
Let's remember here a living example of betrayal caused to a president for acting within Platonic ethics and ignoring Machiavelli's teachings. On August 25, 1973, the president of Chile, Salvador Allende, chose one of the soldiers he considered most loyal to take over as head of the Army. Three weeks later, Pinochet led a military coup to overthrow him and establish a dictatorship that would last 17 years. Pinochet even offered the president a plane to escape, but a radio transmission revealed that his intention was to throw Allende from the plane in mid-flight. Allende trusted Pinochet so much that, on the morning of the day of the coup, he reportedly said: "Call Augusto, he is one of ours."
Do you see how the work seeks to detail the rules for vigilant leadership, what staying in power and the ability to do what is necessary to improve the lives of your subjects can mean?
Incredible as it may seem, there is more ethics in Machiavelli's "The Prince" than in Plato's ideas in "The Republic". This is due to a simple question: ethics aims to investigate human actions and their existing guiding principles. Note that ethics must concern itself with an honest inquiry into how things really are, not how I expect them to be or should be.
By this logic, I tell you that Machiavelli's work "The Prince" is a purely ethical vision, as it reflects the political reality of his time. These are the processes and results that we need to understand to deal with power relations in a government.
That said, I hope I have encouraged you to read the work again and perhaps understand it from a new perspective. It is also important for us, the mere governed, to pay attention to political maneuvers and better align our interests with the national scenario.
But, before proceeding, allow me to explain a little about who Machiavelli was.
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy, on May 3, 1469, and died at the age of 58, on June 21, 1527. He was part of the context of the Italian Renaissance and lived during the government of Lorenzo de Medici.
His father was a jurist and treasurer of an Italian province, and his mother had connections with a noble family in Florence. Machiavelli was the couple's third child.
He studied Latin, the abacus and the foundations of the ancient Greek language. Hence the influence of Classical Antiquity on his thinking, mainly the concept of virtù and fortune, as explained above.
Machiavelli became an important Italian historian, diplomat, musician, philosopher and politician.
It is inserted in the context of transition between the Middle Ages and Renaissance ideas, linked to the bourgeois rise, which played a crucial role in other transformations. The movements of the crusades allowed the emergence of commercial routes and fairs, which enabled the growth of a non-noble middle class, capable of articulating the formation of National States and inserting itself into a new mercantile economy. This generated a struggle between the Catholic Church and the reforms necessary for the formation of the State, resulting in ideological and cultural ruptures.
In 1434, the banker Cosimo de' Medici, at the age of forty, made an exuberant entry into Florence. He wanted to show that he was back in his city, which was a source of misfortune for his enemies, who were banished. There began the principality of the Medici, a large bourgeois family, patrons of arts and letters, who ruled Florence and then Tuscany until 1737, with brief intervals.
At that time, according to expert Piccolomini, the Italian republics had a regime based on so-called "checks and balances". This is a legacy of the Roman political tradition, whose main objective is to prevent one person from obtaining supreme power. Power was divided among members of the guilds, which were professional corporations that brought together bankers, merchants, manufacturing owners, artisans, among others.
The Medici did not risk making alliances openly, but, behind the scenes, Giovanni di Bicci, Cosimo's father, used the family's recently founded bank to forge an international network of contacts. Furthermore, he married his relatives, both men and women, into members of poorer but more powerful families. Cosimo followed the same policy, offering loans to indebted citizens, so that, when they were elected, they would support the Medici interests.
By the time his enemies realized what was happening, it was too late. The Medici had solidified their alliances, and Cosimo's exile would cause a strong wave of dissatisfaction among the population. So much so that, when he returned, he was received with demonstrations of joy by the people. Thus began the dynasty of the Medici family, which lasted around 300 years in Italy.
The most interesting thing is that, according to British expert Stephen Milner, even though Machiavelli tried to "guide" and please his tormentors, the Medici, with his book on politics and power, historians claim that there is no evidence that the family was aware of the book "The prince". Furthermore, the book was published posthumously. Machiavelli wrote it in 1513, but it was only published in 1532, with the permission of Pope Clement VII.
The Medici and, especially, Pope Clement VII never valued Machiavelli, even with all his subservience and attempts to get closer to them during his exile. In an act of desperation, Machiavelli tried to dedicate his book "The Prince" to Lorenzo II de Medici, but all he got, in 1519, were positions of lesser political and military importance, in addition to being hired to write the history of Florence for the Medici.
As for the true hero admired by Machiavelli and perhaps his main reference, we can mention Prince Caesar Borgia, known for his ability to govern through love and fear.
In 1527, Charles V sacked Rome and reestablished the Republic in Florence. However, Machiavelli was excluded from important positions, remaining only in political-military positions, as he did not receive support from the Medici and Pope Clement VII. This was a huge disappointment for the man who originated the term "Machiavellian" to describe those who seek power at any cost.
Although Machiavelli gained much prestige in the period before his exile from Florence, his works "The Prince" and "Mandragora", written during his exile, are still considered great works on the synthesis of power structures and relations in politics.
He could neither witness the unification of Italy nor benefit from his own advice to achieve the political position he sought. However, this does not invalidate the important lessons of his two works.
But what are Machiavelli's central ideas? Let's talk a little about what the author thought about the essential rules and behaviors for a prince to remain in power.
As mentioned previously, Nicholas was not as concerned with how politics should be as theorists thought, as this was considered foolish idealism. His concern was with how politics really is, the naked reality.
For Machiavelli, firstly, if we want to have a realistic perception of politics, we must keep in mind that it is the work of men and that there are men who are evil, miserable, selfish, treacherous, liars, always thinking of their own benefit before think about the benefit of others.Not that there are no men who are virtuous and who defend the common good in this environment, but predominantlyPolitics is, essentially, a game of interests.
Did you understand the first idea? Man is not essentially evil, there are good men, but in politics you must be prepared to deal with both.
Politics should be honest and virtuous, but in practice it is not, therefore, for a sovereign, it is interesting that it appears to be a place of honor and high values. However, this appearance is only valuable to the extent that it convinces the people to maintain order and prevents things from getting out of control. Maintaining social order and domination over enemies and allies is the obligation of a ruler, and he must use all necessary means to achieve this.
Yes, it may seem absurd, but for Machiavelli, a ruler must know how to manipulate the game in his favor, make unpopular decisions when necessary, be firm when necessary and fair when convenient to achieve his objectives.
Recalls thatdid we tell you the story of Pinochet's seizure of power in Chile? Well, if Salvador Allende, then president, followed Machiavelli's advice, he would have been alert to the risks of appointing his supposed friend, and would have condemned him for treason and made him an example for others in the most public and cruel way possible. And soon after, he would gradually take conciliatory measures, small political crumbs to strengthen his ties with Pinochet's former supporters, the reward, according to Machiavelli, must always be little by little, and in small portions, while the punishment to demonstrate power must be quick and as severe as possible. It should serve as an educator for those who plot against you and for those who might think about it.
See this quote taken from the book, in which Machiavelli tells how Duke Caesar Borgia avoided a Civil War and got rid of the bad reputation for the tough decision he made.
He says that the province was full of robberies, fights and all other causes of insolence. In this way, Borgia deemed it necessary to pacify it and make it orderly, that is, to give it good government: however, he appointed Messer Ramirro de Orco, a cruel and diligent man, to whom he gave full powers.
Ramirro quickly made it peaceful and united, with maximum reputation.
However, after a while the Duke [Cesar Borgia] judged that such excessive authority was not necessary, because he was afraid of making such authority odious, and that this would reflect on him as Duke.
To prevent this, he established a civil court in the center of the province, in which every city had its lawyer.
Borgia knew that the severity of the past had generated some hatred in them, and he wanted, to purge the spirits of those people and win them over completely, to show that, if any cruelty had been committed, it had not arisen from him as Duke, but from the cruel nature of his minister.
Thus, Borgia took advantage of this opportunity to place Orco one morning in the square, in Cesena, divided into two parts: with a stick and a bloody knife at his side.”
Note that this quote has two valuable lessons: Ramirro trusted in the Duke's esteem and in the power he thinks he has. The Duke betrayed him, aiming to avoid a revolt in the face of the cruelty used to bring order in the province.
With the death of a man, Caesar cleaned up his image before the population, the population felt vindicated and grateful to the Duke, and order was restored.
For Machiavelli, all government action is justified by the criterion of efficiency, that is, to the extent that it is capable of carrying out the intended political task of maintaining order and peace. Since only power can limit power, the use of force is necessary. According to the author, between being feared and being loved, the ruler must, in principle, desire both, but, if he has to choose between one of the two, he must prefer to be feared, given that fear is much firmer than love.
The author also warns of the dangers of allies, since we are always expecting the worst from our enemies and alert to what is to come, while we never know what to expect from our allies, unless they want to occupy the same place we occupy. Therefore, it is wiser to always be suspicious. Furthermore, allies always want more, with every concession you make, they want even more.
A weak ruler cedes powers to his allies and compromises with his subjects, to whom it may be necessary to break his word. Being morally inflexible is always a mistake for the sovereign, as it leads the nation to chaos. He who governs solely through popularity is doomed to failure, as he only needs to appear virtuous, but behind the scenes the rules are different. If it is necessary to use violence, it must be done; If you have to lie, you must lie.
No nation should be considered above suspicion for a sovereign, they all defend their interests. A historical example of violation of non-aggression agreements is the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed in 1939 between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. This pact was a non-aggression agreement between the two countries, but it also contained a secret protocol that divided Eastern Europe into zones of influence between the two regimes.
However, in June 1941, Nazi Germany violated the pact and launched a surprise invasion of the Soviet Union, beginning Operation Barbarossa. This invasion marked the breach of the non-aggression agreement and resulted in a brutal conflict between the two countries during World War II.
Another point, we can highlight that while Churchill sought to convince the House of Commons and called for urgent retaliation against Germany, in relation to Hitler's fallacious international policies and his warlike movement, the other countries sought to avoid a new war and believed that it was possible resolve everything through dialogue. The result was that, while Hitler pretended to negotiate peace with the English, behind his back Nazism silently invaded the countries neighboring Germany, like a cancer cell.
For Machiavelli, an important lesson is that a ruler must seek the love of his subjects for the values he demonstrates in public. At such moments, he must act in accordance with the ethics of the church and Plato, appear as a man of value, convince people that his government is virtuous and honest. However, when not in public, he must be ruthless with his enemies and be willing to do whatever is necessary to bring order and security to the kingdom, moving away from Platonic and Christian moralism.
A nation must have good armies, and he who has an army of mercenaries is at a greater disadvantage than a prince who has an army of men who respect him. The mercenaries will abandon the battle as soon as they see the difficulty, while the men who respect you will do anything for glory.
We end here, I hope you have had a general overview of Machiavelli, the historical context and some of his ideas written in the book "The Prince". Subscribe to the channel and don't forget to watch the other videos in the series about Machiavelli, where we will bring you the author's most important quotes and a more detailed analysis of the book "The Prince", which was originally supposed to be called "The Principado", but the publisher preferred the translation we know. The curious thing is that only the title of the book was written in Latin, while its content was written in Italian, which was not common at the time.
Comments