THE PRINCE
by Nicolo
Machiavelli
comments by Maarten Maartensz
Go to the Table
of Contents | Previous
Chapter | Next
Chapter
Go to the Text
CHAPTER VIII
Concerning Those
Who Have Obtained A Principality By Wickedness
Note 1:
ALTHOUGH a
prince may rise from a private station in two ways, neither
of which can be entirely attributed to fortune or genius,
yet it is manifest to me that I must not be silent on them,
although one could be more copiously treated when I discuss
republics. These methods are when, either by some wicked or
nefarious ways, one ascends to the principality, or when by
the favour of his fellow-citizens a private person becomes
the prince of his country. And speaking of the first method,
it will be illustrated by two examples- one ancient, the
other modern- and without entering further into the subject,
I consider these two examples will suffice those who may be
compelled to follow them.
This is mostly ironical,
also following hard on the heels of the chapter
in which Cesare Borgia is praised for his
qualities of leadership. Machiavelli no doubt
believed that - as Lord Acton put it - "All
power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Great men are almost always bad men."
The reason "Great men" - political leaders, specifically -
" almost always are bad men" is that they can rise to power and
eminence, and stay there, such as the world is
and men are, only by duplicity, dishonesty,
hypocrisy and fraud. And indeed, apart from that power
corrupts anyway.
Such means as make
one into a political leader are mostly evil
means, when considered in terms of the moral
judgments men ordinarily judge men by.
Likewise,
incidentally:
- Nearly all men
are bad, by such moral principles as they
themselves profess, and
- nearly all men,
in nearly all social circumstances, behave
mostly as
hypocrites,
conformists, and
followers of
fashion, whether in clothing and behavior or in opinion.
Machiavelli, very
probably, would have concurred - and added:
Seeing that these
are the real facts, and seeing that we all only
live once, and in one and the same world, by all
means let us try to work out such realistic
principles as allow most men to lead good lives,
in so far as this is humanly possible.
Also, what one can
rationally criticize a political leader for are
not his duplicity, dishonesty, hypocrisy and
fraud, for he cannot reach eminence without
these, but his ignorance of men and affairs, his
lack of courage and character, and the ends at which he
aims and the general conceptions on
which these ends are founded. Back.
Note 2: Let us clearly note what
means it takes to obtain supreme power:
"One morning he
assembled the people and senate of Syracuse,
as if he had to discuss with them things
relating to the Republic, and at a given
signal the soldiers killed all the senators
and the richest of the people; these dead, he
seized and held the princedom of that city
without any civil commotion."
This is cruel,
immoral and dishonest, but it does work. Also,
not only does it work:
Once one has become
a leader, by whatever means, one automatically
is respected, supported and tolerated, indeed
venerated, by the population one represses or
deceives, because men mostly are thus: they do
follow leaders, especially if these pose as
benevolent, wise and prudent men, and have also
something to reward those they wish to enlist in
their service or keep quiet. Back.
Note 3: This indeed is rather
ambiguous, probably mostly on purpose:
On the one hand,
Machiavelli depicts this dictator as having
"genius" and "greatness of mind", and depicts
his achievements - seizing and holding power in
his city - as being due to his intelligence and
courage; on the other hand, Machiavelli deplores
the means used, and says
"Yet it cannot be
called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to
deceive friends, to be without faith, without
mercy, without religion; such methods may gain
empire, but not glory."
and tops this with
"Nevertheless,
his barbarous cruelty and inhumanity with
infinite wickednesses do not permit him to be
celebrated among the most excellent men."
However,
Machiavelli's real message is:
If you want to
succeed, these are the means you must be willing
and able to use, and must expect to be
used willingly against you. Furthermore, he
proceeds to draw a lesson from this "barbarous
cruelty and inhumanity with infinite wickednesses", that follows later
on. Back.
Note 4:
...Oliverotto da Fermo...
Another Machiavellian
example of a contemporary he knew, also an admirer of
Cesare Borgia, who achieved
power by such means as Machiavelli discusses in
"The Prince" and recommends to would-be
princes and princelings, and all manner of
political leaders - not because such means are moral,
for they are not, but because such means are used,
and effective, unlike more moral means,
basically because of the qualities most men have
and lack.
Let's see what
Machiavelli lists, as factual qualities
and behaviors of one who did effectively seize
power in a state:
- being endowed
with wit and a vigorous body and mind
- it appearing to
him a paltry thing to serve under others
- finding fools to
whom the slavery of their country was dearer
than its liberty
- using duplicity,
treachery and false promises
Back.
Note 5: Further characteristics
of a successful aspiring political dictator:
- murdering those
in power through treachery and false promises
- forcing the
people to obey by making them fear doing
anything else
- killing all the
malcontents who were able to injure him
- strengthened
himself with new civil and military ordinances
But then this very
exemplary specimen of a political careerist
himself was tricked and murdered by
Machiavelli's prime exponent of political
leadership and prime example of means calculated
to be effective in politics, namely Cesare
Borgia. Back.
Note 6: Here Machiavelli answers
the question why some cruel politicians succeed
and others soon fail (in the 20th Century e.g.
Stalin compared to Pol Pot). His answer is:
"I believe that
this follows from severities being badly or
properly used. Those may be called properly
used, if of evil it is lawful to speak well,
that are applied at one blow and are necessary
to one's security, and that are not persisted
in afterwards unless they can be turned to the
advantage of the subjects. The badly employed
are those which, notwithstanding they may be
few in the commencement, multiply with time
rather than decrease."
That seems mostly
correct, but Machiavelli was not acquainted with
modern totalitarian police states, in which
cruel leaders may well hold power for a
generation or more (as did Stalin, Mao, Assad,
Kim Il Sung, Sadam Hussein and quite a few
others in the 20th C).
The reason for this is that
with modern technology and weaponry it
is much easier to repress a population
ruthlessly than it used to be in previous
centuries. Back.
Note 7: The previous paragraph
issues in the following advice of Machiavelli to
aspiring political leaders:
"in seizing a
state, the usurper ought to examine closely
into all those injuries which it is necessary
for him to inflict, and to do them all at one
stroke so as not to have to repeat them daily;
and thus by not unsettling men he will be able
to reassure them, and win them to himself by
benefits."
which is, in its
own way, sound and humane enough, and in modern
times no longer applicable: A political tyrant
who is willing to go as far as technology may
carry him, can subjugate an enormous population
with a small force - as shown in the former
Soviet Union, Communist China, or modern
Iraq. Back.
Note 8:
And above
all things, a prince ought to live amongst his people in
such a way that no unexpected circumstances, whether of good
or evil, shall make him change; because if the necessity for
this comes in troubled times, you are too late for harsh
measures; and mild ones will not help you, for they will be
considered as forced from you, and no one will be under any
obligation to you for them.
Another piece of
Machiavellian advice to political leaders:
Whatever your style of rule is, let it be
constant, for men like their rulers to be
predictable.
Unfortunately, the
previous remark applies: Modern holders of
supreme powers have a much more powerful
technology to support them than previous holders
of supreme powers - which incidentally not only
holds for arms and information (spying), but
also for propaganda and the control of the
media. Back.
Go to the Table of
Contents | Previous
Chapter | Next
Chapter
Go to the Text
copyright:
maartens@xs4all.nl.