Key Features of Niccolo Machiavelli’s Political Thought

Machiavelli is considered by many as the first modern man given the fact that the ideas which he had propagated through, ‘The Prince’ were voiced out long before they had materialized and had caused the ushering in of the modern age. At a time when he was born, modernity had not yet arrived back then in the 14^th century, but the ideas that he had provided was something which was unthinkable back then. The language in which he had expressed his political leanings were indeed quite dreadful and lacking the essence of morality, and that was very much evident in the way modern society functioned. In this essay an analytical account of why Machiavelli is considered as the first modern man shall be discussed, which shall be the thesis statement of the article. Thus the central question shall be to consider if at all Machiavelli could be considered as the First Modern Man !

It would not be considered as an unjustified statement to consider that the ideas propounded by Machiavelli were far ahead of his times. He might as well occur as a champion of autocratic rule but what he had expressed very explicitly came to be the dominant governing and guiding principle of modern day politics. Although he had never explicitly mentioned of the principles that have been theoretically explained to define the way his values have materialized in the modern age, he must be given the credit for it (Puchner 22).

“All the States and Governments by which men are or ever have been ruled, have been and are either Republics or Princedoms (Machiavelli).” Machiavelli had expressed deep support for a nation state. Italy was in his times was divided into several principalities who were constantly at loggerheads with each other. ‘The Prince’ revolves around the advice to the ruling Medici Family about uniting the warring territories and form a single territorial unit under the rule of one single king. Most modern nation states have been formed by means of uniting several belligerent territorial units into one single composite and unified territorial unit under the leadership of one head. The fate which he had desired and envisaged for the principalities under the Medici Family, is the form of government which is followed and practiced in most nations of the modern world today, invariably. Homogenization by political means is something which is considered as the ideal form of governance and government all over the world (Puchner 17). “Hence it comes that all armed prophets have been victorious, and all unarmed prophets have been destroyed (Machiavelli).” This signifies that Machiavelli wanted the Medici family to defeat the conflict that was going on in the principalities and rise above them.

Even before Europe had provided the for the most comprehensive form of secularism to the world by separating the state and the church and delimiting their spheres of influence from interfering or posing any form of impediment in each other’s mode of functioning, Machiavelli had already voiced it in his memoir consisting of a set of advice for the Medici Family to consolidate their rule over the principalities. To him religious virtues were very much antithetical to the principles ought to be cherished by a ruler as ethics, which embodies religious principles do not fetch men success in the long run (Puchner 32). “Therefore it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them. And I shall dare to say this also, that to have them and always to observe them is injurious, and that to appear to have them is useful; to appear merciful, faithful, humane, religious, upright, and to be so, but with a mind so framed that should you require not to be so, you may be able and know how to change to the opposite (Machiavelli).” Thus morality is something which has no place in Machiavellian discourse.

“The main foundations of every state, new states as well as ancient or composite ones, are good laws and good arms – you cannot have good laws without good arms, and where there are good arms, good laws inevitably follow (Machiavelli).” Karl Marx, the one to provide a modernist understanding of socialism and communism had in his theorization considered the state to be a coercive apparatus, which ruled over people by means of forcing the people to accept the domination, which is very much evident in the quotation of Machiavelli (Block). Antonio Gramsci had said that it is not always by force that the state rules, sometimes it is by the consent of the people that the state perpetrates its rule over the people (Puchner 23). “He who becomes a Prince through the favour of the people should always keep on good terms with them; which it is easy for him to do, since all they ask is not to be oppressed (Machiavelli).” Hence the ruler according to the Machiavellian discourse must be very shrewd and make judicious judgement as to when the Prince should be using force and when he should be suppressing the people. Neo Marxist Gramsci, author of the book ‘The Prison Notebooks’ and an Italian Marxist thinker had talked of the fact that if the State uses too much force on its people then there is every possibility that maintaining the rule would become difficult, hence it must be balance in its approach towards benevolence and towards highhandedness (Mouffe). “But above all he must refrain from seizing the property of others, because a man is quicker to forget the death of his father than the loss of his patrimony (Machiavelli).” This piece of advice to the Prince shows the balanced approach of Machiavelli with regard to perpetration of the rule (Puchner 44).

“God is not willing to do everything, and thus take away our free will and that share of glory which belongs to us (Machiavelli).” This particular quotation of Machiavelli shows his rational bent of mind which is very much reflective of the fact that human beings must fend for themselves. This also forms the basis of his understanding that politics and religion do not hand in hand. In the modern world, most organizations function on bureaucratic lines as propounded by Weber who had defined about bureaucracy in his sociological works (Bennis). It necessitates that they are value free and the rules and regulations of it are very rationally chalked out. Hence statecraft has to essentially free from the influence of religion. Christianity was the dominant religion that was practiced and observed by the people during the times of Machiavelli. In his views if the Prince had to rule over his people then he would have to eschew all moral values. Moral values were essentially religious in nature hence Machiavelli sought to separate politics from religion. Had politics been governed by religion then it would have been too difficult for the Medici family to maintain their rule and safeguard themselves against the rising tide of opposition and rebellion from the several warring principalities (Puchner 61). “The fact is that a man who wants to act virtuous in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous (Machiavelli).” Machiavelli was guided by the predisposition that morality caused people to go weak and the Prince could not afford to be morally upright.

“It is not titles that honour men, but men that honour titles (Machiavelli).” This particular quotation from the Prince suggests that in order to create a respectable position for oneself, it is necessary that the ruler relies totally on his own capabilities without being dependent on anyone else. In politics it is very important to be sovereign, that is of being independent both internally and externally with regard to perpetration of the rule. Unless a ruler frees himself from the interference of other agencies, his rule can never be successful. If a ruler is too dependent on an external agency for staying at power, he shall surely be doomed at some point of time. Thus it is extremely necessary for the ruler to rule independently and free from the influence of some other agents (Puchner 57). “In conclusion, the arms of others either fall from your back, or they weigh you down, or they bind you fast (Machiavelli).” Machiavelli had thus alerted that a rule which is not free of interference cannot thrive.

“Though fraud in all other actions be odious, yet in matters of war it is laudable and glorious, and he who overcomes his enemies by stratagem is as much to be praised as he who overcomes them by force (Machiavelli).” Politics is all about the display of power in the respective spheres. Hobbes, one of the scholars who have talked about the social contract theory, have in his theorization of the state if nature explain  that men are out there to preserve their own life against the encroachment or jeopardizing effect unleashed by someone else. Hence it is extremely necessary that in Politics one devotes adequate attention to preserve one’s own interest the best possible way one can (Elahi). “If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared (Machiavelli).” In politics it is very difficult to trust someone as everyone is a potential enemy. The fear of harm is forever looming large on the territorial integrity of a ruler. There are many such agents out there who are on a look out for opportunities to safeguard their own interest at the cost of depriving someone else. The dangers are not just external, they can even come from internal sources as well. Hence it is extremely necessary that the ruler develops personality and the necessary capabilities which shall be safeguarding him from being overpowered by someone else (Puchner 30). “It is much safer to be feared than loved because …love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage e; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails (Machiavelli).” This shows that Machiavelli was in favour of a repressive state.

These traits which have been discussed so far makes Machiavelli as the First Modern Political Thinker. The manifestation of his ideas had taken place much later and that age came to be called as the age of modernity from the 17^th century onwards.

In the previous section an account of the ideas of Machiavelli had been explained. In this section the relevance of them shall be provided, in order to prove that Machiavelli is indeed the First Modern Man. According to Puchner, Secularism, Nationalism, Rationality, Realism are some of the key political principles that are prominent in the social sphere in today’s world. The French Revolution had taken France by a storm and causing a sea change in the way it used to function. France became a Republic from being a Monarchy and that had brought about a sense of nationalism in the country. Religion and the State were separated paving for a new system of governance which was essentially secular and free from any form of bias of any kind, which made the system very rational. As Puchner mentioned, soon after the French Revolution other countries of Europe followed the system of modern system of state government. Europe had also disseminated the same system in other parts of the world which it had colonized. In the post colonial regime at the third world countries the form of government that was followed was essentially statist and was a colonial legacy. If one devotes attention at the current political scenario that is prevalent internationally, one can find that it is essentially realist as all the states are on a spree to serve their selfish interest. They can help out other states or can destroy it for the sake of safeguarding their national interest. If we look at the occupation of the middle east by the western nations then it becomes very clear that the latter were safeguarding their national interest. The same logic applies for colonialism as well (Puchner 30). These incidents show the turning point in history which had taken place long after Machiavelli’s death in the 17^th and 18^th century onwards.

Conclusion

Though Machiavelli was a champion of Absolute Monarchy it might seem that democratic governance systems cannot be defined by the principles enshrine by him, but that is a misconception. It is so because safeguarding the selfish interest is something which no regime can ever do away with. Thus the instances support the central question and the thesis statement that Machiavelli is indeed the first modern man, since his ideas were indeed modern in the context of the time he had expressed them in the 16^th century.

References

Bennis, Warren G. “Beyond bureaucracy.” American Bureaucracy. Routledge, 2017. 3-16.

Block, Fred. “The ruling class does not rule: Notes on the Marxist theory of the state.” Socialist Revolution 33.7 (1977): 6-28.

Elahi, Manzoor. “Social Contract Theory by Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau.” Retrieved November 16 (2016): 3013.

Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince; Transl. from the Italian. Penguin, 1961.

Mouffe, Chantal. “Hegemony and ideology in Gramsci.” Gramsci and Marxist Theory (RLE: Gramsci). Routledge, 2014. 178-214.

Puchner, Martin, et al. “The Norton Anthology of World Literature.” (2012).Q