Niccolo Machiavelli's Theory on Political Leadership (Why is Machiavellian Theory in "The Prince" considered so controversial?)

Niccolo Machiavelli's legacy, throughout history, has been tarnished so greatly by notoriety that today the term "Machiavellian" (which is named after him) is considered synonymous with cunningness, craftiness, and unscrupulousness.

Not only that but there is a personality trait called "Machiavellianism" named after this person which refers to (and you guessed it) cunningness, manipulation, and callousness; the traits that are normally observed in individuals with psychopathic tendencies.

But what did this man do to earn this infamous reputation?

Why are his theories considered so controversial?

Why is there a whole personality trait named after this person?

Before we get into the thick of it, let's get to know who Machiavelli was.

Introduction

Niccolo di Bernardo Dei Machiavelli was born on May 3, 1469 in Florence, Italy. He was a diplomat, philosopher, author, and historian. Throughout his life, he wrote many books, poems, and plays and served in many government positions. But the book that I am going to refer to in this article is "The Prince" (Machiavelli, 1532) in which he articulated some of his political views. He died on June 21, 1527, in Florence, Italy.

Niccolo Machiavelli's Theory on Political Leadership

The Prince

In 1532, Machiavelli wrote one of his most famous political treatises "The Prince". In his book, he argued that a prince or a leader should be willing to maintain the power and sovereignty of the state by any means necessary. This could mean a leader could achieve this rule using force, deceit, ruthlessness, etc. without any moral or ethical rationale whatsoever.

The priority of a prince should be political stability. Doesn't matter if the measures taken to achieve said political stability are compassionate or cruel, fair or unfair, and moral or immoral.

In The Prince, he mentioned:

It's better for a ruler to be widely feared than greatly loved if one cannot be both

The Machiavellian character traits of a ruler are:

• A ruler:

1. should be cruel rather than merciful. 
2. should be stingy rather than generous.
3. should break promises if keeping them would be against one's interest.

Raison d'état

Machiavelli proposed in The Prince that the demands and continuity of the state should take precedence over any individual or community within or outside the state. 

This is the concept of “raison d'état” or “reason of state” which allows for cruel measures to be taken for the insurance of the state’s survival.

Why is the Machiavellian Theory considered so controversial?

So the question begs, why is the Machiavellian theory on political leadership considered so controversial?

The reason could be that Machiavelli continuously rejected the idea of moral or ethical constraints on one’s political actions and argued the opposite; that these constraints caused hindrance in a state’s prosperity. 

He argued that a leader should be free of any traditional, moral, or ethical implications when implementing state rulings and managing state affairs. According to Machiavelli, the ultimate goal of a state is to hold and sustain power, and he saw the acquisition and maintenance of power through any means (and I mean ANY means) as a fundamental aspect of human nature.

In his time, The Prince was considered an "immoral" book as following it would lead to tyranny instead of prosperity. Machiavelli's views regarding the use of cunning, deceit, and force in a state by a political leader were against the traditional views of that time which advocated for politics and religion to be inseparable.

While some might argue that Machiavelli aimed for the preservation of both the state and the people's well-being by presenting a rather debatable theory, historical events and current realities paint a contrasting picture where the employment of forceful means to attain political control often leads to widespread unrest and a population living in fear.

Conclusion

To sum up, Machiavelli believed that for a ruler to achieve political success, one must be willing to employ any tactic necessary to preserve and exert one's political power and authority. The Machiavellian argument provides arguably a more pragmatic approach to political leadership and proposes that the "interests of the state" should be preferred over the "welfare of an individual". He suggested that the "Moral" aspect of leadership should be removed and a more “ends justify the means” approach should be implemented. Needless to say, his theory entailed a lot of controversies and is debated even to this day.

 

The question of whether Machiavelli's theories provide a more effective path toward political success is open to interpretation and depends on personal perspective. 

If you want more info regarding this subject matter, I urge you to buy Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince or a renowned commentary on it. 

What are your opinions on the Machiavellian theory? Comment about your take regarding this matter.

References

• What can you learn from Machiavelli.
• Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia (2023, February 3). The Prince. Encyclopedia Britannica. 
• Machiavelli, N. (1532). The Prince.

Did you know?

Medium is an online publishing platform that allows many aspiring writers like me to share their work and inspire.

It has a huge online community of like minded-people aspiring to make a change through the power of words. It's a hub where on daily basis, hundreds of thousands of high-quality and engaging articles are published on all sorts of topics whatsoever. I spend hours and hours scrolling through its never-ending stream of informative and innovative posts.

So if you are like me, and you want the best content there is, out there, Medium is the right place for it.

Click Here to sub to me on Medium as it would support me and enable me to produce more high-quality content.

I appreciate you, folks!