Machiavelli

Machiavelli

• Intro: was an Italian Renaissance diplomat, philosopher and writer, best known for The Prince, considered as best book ever on statecraft.

• Context-
• Rise of nation states in Europe
• Italy was divided into 5 feudal kingdoms. So mach wanted consolidation of Italy into a strong nation state to deter any invasion.
• Italy was the seat of Roman church. heavy corruption in church that was percolating down to the common man.
• When he was diplomat in the court of France, he was referred to as Mr. NIhilio. Mr. zero. Which means that he came from a place that has no respect among the countries of Europe

• Ideas:
• Prince should know art of management of power. He should be an enterprising person, i.e. a political entrepreneur.
• Takes power view of politics. Realpolitik.
• National interest is supreme. Nothing should come in its way, not even person’s religion or his ethics
• True child of Renaissance because he separated church and state ( Hobbes put the church below the state)
• His prince is not hereditary monarch but a political entrepreneur
• Prince should know history and psychology rather than philosophy.

• Advises

1. First understand politics as to what kind of profession it is before you enter into it. In politics you have to be clever like fox and brave like lion.
2. Wants prince to look at things as they are. Those who abandon what is for what ought to be will not only ruin himself but also his people.
3. Understand then nature of people you’ll be dealing with Man is by nature selfish, coward, ungrateful, fickle minded, avaricious and deceitful.
4. Man gives more importance to self interest than interest of state. Man will easily forget favours done by prince as man is ungrateful. Hence prince cannot take their support for granted. According to him human nature has remained constant throughout history and Prince must not expect probability of change in human nature
5. Hence advises prince to maintain law and order so that man can pursue his thirst for property. Also a wise prince will never confiscate property rather execute the person.
6. man is fearful of his life and if prince can give him security of  his life , he would control the man. 
7. Prince has to be Cold blooded . Don't act in passion.
8. “People love at their own will, but they fear at the will of the prince.”
9. Ends justify means. Period. if prince is able to achieve his ends, no one will inquire into his means, however if he sacrifices the ends for the sake of purity of means, no one can absolve him of his guilts.
10. A prince should not essentially avoid vices such as cruelty or dishonesty if employing them will benefit the state
11. raison d’etat: whatever is done is purely done in national interest.
12. On religion:
1. First person to separate religion and church.
2. He was against church and not religion. In fact he had utilitarian approach towards religion. religion can be used in the interest of the nation, though religion cannot be allowed to use state for the sake of religion.
3. Religion can be of great help to prince. it is a disciplinary force.
4. He even advises prince not to appear anti-religious even when prince has no faith in religion.
5. However, Mahatma Gandhi opposed to such view and talked about positive secularism with religion intermixing in society and state so as to promote peace and harmony amongst all.
6. http://www.surendranathcollege.org/new/upload/PARAMITA_CHAKRABORTYMachiavelli2020-07-11machiavelli.pdf
13. Dual morality- morality of a prince and common man are different. A common man can afford to sacrifice his life for the sake of principles but a prince cannot sacrifice interest interest of a nation for the sake of his morals

in politics one should not go for what is universally correct rather what is correct in a given situation

1. Supports imperialist foreign policy
2. Should have army of Nationals only.
3. On bad luck. Prince should be brave.
4. On fortune: Prince cannot control his fortune but only his actions. Bad luck can strike anywhere and anytime. But if prince faces these circumstances with courage , he can turn the bad times into good times.
5. where people are corrupt, he prefers monarchy, where they are virtuous he prefers republic.

• Kautilya and Machiavelli:

1. J L Nehru in his book-the discovery of India called Kautilya as Indian Machiavelli
2. similarity:
1. Both shift attention from political philosophy to political science, from idealism to realism
2. Both make a distinction between ethics and politics
3. Both are more interested in ensuring the security of state against external threats and internal conflicts rather than building ideal state
4. focusing more on what is than what ought to be
5. Both placed great emphasis on conquest and expansion of territory
6. Both emphasise that war should be the last resort. They argue  that war causes loss of money and life and thus to the material well being of the state.
7. Like Kautilya he emphasised not just on hard power but use of diplomacy, domestic politics, tactics, geographic mastery and historical analysis to fight war.
3. Differences:
1. While Machiavellian prince is above morality, Kautilya never kept his king above dharma
2. while Machiavellian's idea remained in theory, kautilya’s idea were implemented by CG Maurya
3. 
   Max Weber in his book politics as vocation says Machiavelli's prince appears harmless in comparison to Kautilya’s Arthashastra

Critics:

1: George Holland Sabine- calls him narrowly dated and narrowly located. A child of his times.

2.Gandhi- Hind Swaraj: don't expect roses from a plant of babool. For him politics w/o ethics is a death trap.

• Conclusion.
  
  Dunning- Every one is Machiavellian in politics but no one accepts so. Calls him first modern political thinker.
• 
  Laski calls him father of political realism.