SOME RANDOM SHIT ALRIGHT

Machiavelli Prince

·         Principalities can be divided into hereditary principalities and new principalities. New principalities are either completely new or new appendages to existing states.

·         By fortune or Talent, a prince can acquire a new principality with his own army or with the arms of others.

·         Republic - A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president

·         It is easier to govern a hereditary state than a new principality for two main reasons. First, those under the rule of such states are familiar with the prince’s family and are therefore accustomed to their rule. The natural prince only has to keep past institutions intact, while adapting these institutions to current events. Second, the natural disposition of subjects in a hereditary state is to love the ruling family, unless the prince commits some horrible act against his people.

·         Maintaining a new principality is harder than maintaining a hereditary state because the people will do anything to continue changing the leader, expecting the new leader to be better each time. They believe that they will continue progressing once they elect a new leader.

·         When a prince takes over another prince’s domain, he finds himself in a tricky situation with regard to the people who put him in power. He cannot maintain the support of these people because he cannot fulfill all of their expectations that their situation will improve. But he also cannot deal too harshly with them because he is in their debt. Immediately after taking power, the prince is in danger of losing his newly gained principality.

·          Once a prince suppresses a revolt he can punish his opposition, in order to avoid another one.

·         It is much easier to maintain control over a new principality if the people share the same language and customs as the prince’s own country, people will live quietly and peacefully so long as their old ways of life are undisturbed.

·          New states that have different languages and customs from those of the prince are more difficult to maintain. One of the prince’s most effective options is to take up residence in the new state. By living there, the prince can address problems quickly and efficiently. those who are inclined to be good will have more reason to show their allegiance to the prince and those who are inclined to be bad will have more reason to fear him

·         Another effective method of dealing with linguistic and cultural differences is to establish colonies in the new state

·         A prince should injure people only if he knows there is no threat of revenge. Setting up military bases throughout the new state will not effectively keep order. Instead, it will upset the people, and these people may turn into hostile enemies capable of causing great harm to the prince’s regime.

·         A prince who has occupied a state in a foreign country should dominate the neighboring states. He should weaken the strong ones and ensure that no other strong foreign power invades a neighboring state. Weaker powers will naturally side with the strongest power as long as they cannot grow strong themselves

·         In order to hold a state, a prince must understand statecraft and warcraft. The two are intertwined. War can be avoided by suppressing disorder. However, one can never escape a war: war can only be postponed to the enemy’s advantage.

·         The first involves a prince and appointed ministers. While the ministers help govern, everyone remains subservient to the prince. The second way involves a prince and nobles. Nobles are not appointed by the prince, but they benefit from their ancient lineage and have subjects of their own.

·         It is much harder to take over a country if a prince uses ministers, because ministers have little incentive to be corrupted by foreign powers or to turn on their prince.

·         Although it is easier to take over a state ruled by nobles, it is much harder to maintain control of that state. In a state ruled by nobles, it is not enough to kill the former ruler’s family, because the nobles will still be around to revolt. Holding onto a state with ministers is much easier, because it merely requires killing off the one prince and his family.

·         One important difference between Machiavelli’s philosophy and other philosophies of government lies in his description of the ordinary subject. Aristotle’s political writings describe a citizenry that is by nature political and very interested in the welfare of the community. Though Aristotle disregards the majority of people who live within the Greek city-state—women and slaves—he considers the free citizens to be the very reason for the state’s existence. Machiavelli, on the other hand, sees the ordinary citizen as a piddling, simpleminded creature. Such people will either love or hate their ruler, depending on whether they are harmed or injured, but as long as the prince can maintain control, he need have little concern for their welfare.

·         Thus, the purpose of government is not the good of the people but the stability of the state and the perpetuation of the established ruler’s control. Machiavelli does not concern himself with what goes on inside the state but what occurs externally.

·         Whereas the ancient Greeks conceived of a close relationship between ethics and politics, Machiavelli seems to separate these disciplines altogether

·         Machiavelli describes three ways to hold states that have been accustomed to living freely under their own laws. The first is to devastate them. The second is for the conqueror to occupy them. The third is to allow the state to maintain its own laws, but to charge taxes and establish an oligarchy to keep the state friendly

·         The memories of ancient liberty never die, so a prince will be better off destroying the republic or personally occupying the conquered state.

·         Princes should strive to imitate the examples set by great rulers of the past, even if that means setting lofty goals

·         One way princes take control of states is through Virtue (talent). Acquiring states through virtue, is extremely difficult but a lot easier to maintain control of.

·         A prince who relies on his ability to persuade others to support him will be unable to succeed against such opposition. However, a prince who relies on his own prowess and can “force the issue” will usually succeed

·         Princes who achieve states by good fortune, are not good princes because they lack the skill to lead.

·         Princes who rely on fortune reach their position easily, maintaining that position is extremely difficult.

·         Cesare Borgia had the skill to create power and maintain it during his rule, but was stricken with bad fortune when his father died, which in turn lead to his demise and falling.

·         Men are, by nature, followers. Even rulers are followers to some extent: Machiavelli notes at the start of Chapter VI that aspiring princes are always inclined to “imitate” the examples of great men.

·         The ruler is the state, and the state is ruler. The people hardly matter.

·         The more self-reliant the prince, the more he will prove capable of success.

·         In addition to fortune and prowess, criminal acts or the approval of his fellow citizens can facilitate a man’s rise to power.

·         Princes who commit criminal acts can achieve power, but never glory.

·         Cruelty, which is itself evil, can be used well if it is applied once at the outset, and thereafter only employed in self-defence and for the greater good of one’s subjects. Regular and frequent perpetration of cruel actions earns a ruler infamy.

·         Constitutional principalities –When a prince comes into power through the power of his fellow citizens.

·         Machiavelli argues that every city is populated by two groups of citizens: common people and nobles. The common people are naturally disposed to avoid domination and oppression by the nobles. The nobles are naturally disposed to dominate and oppress the common people. The opposition between the two groups results in the establishment of either a principality, a free city, or anarchy.

·         The power to form a principality lies with either the nobles or the people. If the nobles realize they cannot dominate the people, they will try to strengthen their position by making one of the nobles a prince

·         The people will follow the same course of action; if they realize they cannot withstand the nobles, they will make one of the people a prince and hope to be protected by the prince’s authority.

·         A prince placed in power by nobles will find it more difficult to maintain his position because those who surround him will consider themselves his equals and his selection as prince arbitrary. However, a prince created by the people stands alone at the top.

·         a prince should be wary of ambitious nobles, since they will become enemies in times of adversity.

·         Machiavelli does not say that princes must be cruel but not extremely cruel. Instead, he argues that cruel acts must be committed as necessary, but all at once and then ceased, so that the populace will forget them

·         a prince’s power invariably depends on internal support. Whether a prince uses cruelty or benevolence to obtain that support is secondary to the necessity of gaining the support itself.

·         while any prince can achieve and maintain power, glory remains a more elusive goal.

·         Machiavelli also characterizes the use of cruelty as “evil.” In some cases, cruelty is a necessary evil, and using it can be justified in the interests of some greater public good,

·         But a prince who has made adequate defensive preparations can actually inspire his subjects during such times. To do so, he must convince the people that the hardships are only temporary and, more importantly, create feelings of patriotism and enthusiasm for the city’s defense

·         the current Church, under the leadership of Pope Leo X, has been made strong through the force of arms. It is now hoped that Pope Leo will use his goodness and virtue to maintain its power

·         One surprising characteristic of The Prince is how completely it defines the city as an entity existing to serve its ruler rather than its populace

·         obtaining the support of the people is not a goal in itself but rather a means for ensuring that the city remain fortified and resistant to foreign conquest

·         The ultimate goal is not happiness but patriotism: the defense of the state and its ruler

·         The two essential components of a strong state are good laws and good armies. Good laws cannot exist without good armies. The presence of a good army, however, indicates the presence of good laws.

·         If a prince does not command his own native troops, the principality can never be secure. Depending on outside armies is essentially the same as depending on good fortune.

·         The only thing a prince needs to study is the art of war. This is the primary discipline of the ruler

·         A prince who does not understand warfare attempting to lead an army is like the unarmed man trying to lead the armed.

·         warcraft is not just one component among other equally important components of statesmanship. Instead, it is the very foundation upon which all states are built

·         Such vices are truly evil if they endanger the state, but when vices are employed in the proper interests of the state, a prince must not be influenced by condemnation from other men.

·         A reputation for generosity requires outward lavishness, which eventually depletes all of the prince’s resources.

·         In sum, generosity is self-defeating. Generosity uses up resources and prevents further generosity. While parsimony might lead to ignominy, generosity will eventually lead to hatred.

·         Ideally, a prince should be both loved and feared, but this state of affairs is difficult to attain

·         In times of remote danger, they are willing to take risks for their prince, but if the danger is real, they turn against their prince. It is easy to break a bond of love when the situation arises, but the fear of punishment is always effective

·         When inducing fear, however, a prince must be careful to avoid inducing hatred.

·         Chapter XV attacks the conceptions of virtue proposed by classical philosophers. Machiavelli criticizes the concept of a “good life,” the Aristotelian doctrine that demands virtuous actions in all types of behavior. Machiavelli debunks Aristotle’s metaphysical approach to politics by arguing that metaphysics is inconsistent with the real world. Ultimately, a philosophy must be judged by its practical consequences. Because virtue, as an abstract concept, does not concern itself with such consequences, it can never serve as an effective guide for political action. Machiavelli’s definition of virtue is not the same as that of classical philosophers. While Aristotle and others define virtue in relation to a highest good, Machiavelli defines it simply as that which receives the praise of others. Thus, generosity is a virtue only because other people praise it.

·         Machiavelli urges the prince not to worry too much about what others might think of his actions and to act only in the way that will result in the best practical advantage—which will often garner greater approval from other people in the long run

·         Both Aristotle believed in the middle path

·         Laws come naturally to men, force comes naturally to beasts. In order to succeed, the prince must learn how to fight both with laws and with force—he must become half man and half beast.

·         internal insurrection from his subjects and external threats from foreign powers

·         Machiavelli does not argue that a prince should actively avoid doing what is good but that, if necessary, a prince must be prepared to act unethically

·         Of course, the prince’s aim is not to be loved, but merely to avoid being hated. Although Machiavelli’s prince rules in an autocratic state, he must nonetheless practice the kind of politics of image demanded within republics and democracies.

·         hese chapters give us further insight into Machiavelli’s view of human nature. Men are naturally deceitful and untrustworthy. They are likely to break promises. They are easily impressed by appearances and results. They are selfish but somewhat naïve. They respect and praise virtue, but most do not possess it themselves.

·         Nobility can be achieved by the grand public display of rewards and punishments. Above all, princes should win a reputation for being men of outstanding ability

·         If possible, a prince should avoid siding with an ally whose power is greater than his own. Victory in this situation will only put the prince at mercy of that ally.

·         There are three types of intellect that men can possess: the ability to understand things independently, the ability to appreciate another person’s ability to understand things, and the ability to do neither. The first kind is best, the second acceptable, and the third useless.

·         a prince must avoid hatred and suppress opposition before it can gain sufficient momentum to disrupt his rule.

·         , a prince must possess independent intellect in order to succeed

·         Machiavelli’s view of politics is more meritocratic than aristocratic, as he suggests that hereditary princes have even more to prove than those who obtain power through intelligence and skill.

·