Machiavelli's the Prince

Machiavelli's The Prince is a comprehensive account of national and international politics in regards to the smooth and successful rule of the state. He argues from the point of view of a leader and says that given human nature, there is a particular way that a ruler must rule in order to ensure that civility and order are maintained. In doing so, he touches on several topics that are even relevant to this day. For instance, he posits theories on the proper allies for a nation Ð'- or principality to use Machiavelli's vernacular Ð'- along with the ideal form of the state, the problems and effective solutions of ruling newly conquered territories, the characteristics necessary for a great leader/ruler and the importance of war and its antonymous counterpart, peace. His position is rather persuasive given that he reputes himself as being of inferior status Ð'- i.e. part of the masses Ð'- as he addresses his writing to his then sovereign Lorenzo de' Medici, so his pro-government position seems to have more credibility given his social status as one of the masses and not simply a mouthpiece to ruling powers.

He begins by positing that all governments either fall into the category of being a republic or a principality, the latter of which constitutes his focus in The Prince. These principalities are in turn classified as either hereditary or new meaning that in the case of the former, the principality was handed down from generations of rulers and in the latter the principality was newly acquired. This last group is either accustomed to being ruled by one man or to possessing freedom according to Machiavelli and, furthermore, they are obtained via allied soldiers' efforts or as a result of the efforts of domestic ones. He says that the acquisition actually takes place in lieu of two principles, either fortune or strength, which he refers to as virtÐ"â„-.

Machiavelli draws most of his conclusions from things we take for granted. For instance, he states an a priori fact that namely a newly conquered state is either in the geographic region or not as the conquering nation and the citizens themselves speak the same language and hold the same customs or they do not. From this, he argues that it in the former case it is easy to acquire compliance from these new citizens if change in the order of things as they are accustomed to it is minimized to reflect that of their former rule. To this effect he adds, "If the old territories and the new have similar customs, the new subjects will live quietlyÐ'...He who acquires neighboring territories in this way, intending to hold on to them, need to see to two things: First, he must ensure their previous ruler has no heirs; and second, he must not alter their old laws or impose new taxes" (Machiavelli, 424). If this formula is adhered to, the he guarantees that the conqueror will be able to hold onto his new acquisition.

However, if the territory possesses more differences than grounds for commonality with the acquirer, then Machiavelli predicts a more of a problematic settlement to be reached. To handle a situation of this magnitude where the new territory may speak different languages and possess different customs and norms, he states that the new ruler must have fortune and resourcefulness on his side. Out of this combination, the best policy to arise should be the enactment of the new ruler living in his new territory. This policy has the benefit of two outcomes because by living in the new territory, the ruler is able to pinpoint any shortcomings and problems that need to be addressed and once these arise, the ruler can take immediate, decisive action. If the ruler lives too far away, then the converse becomes true i.e. he is unable to know the inherent problems within the territory and thus unable to fix them. In addition, the ruler can prevent his own administrators from ravaging the land and engaging in forms of corruption that subsequently harm the citizens. If the ruler is nearby, then the citizens can easily appeal to him in the event that they have any grievances to report thus endowing them with more reason to love the ruler given that they act in a manner befitting of citizens and if they are ill-mannered then they have a reason to fear the ruler.

The next step in this plan of settling a conquered territory is a bit more militaristic than the first. He argues that it may become necessary to "send colonies to settle in one or two places; they will serve to tie your new subjects down" (424). The new ruler can either adopt this approach or employ the services of an army. If he sends "colonies" to settle the land then he will incur minimal expense because colonies cost next to nothing to run. In addition, the number of people who will be harmed or disgruntled in lieu of this is minimal given that "You will only offend those from whom you seize fields and houses to give to your settlers, and they will be only a tiny minority within the territory" (424). As a consequence, this small group will become disenfranchised and poor, which means that they are not a threat to the ruler, while the other citizens remain unharmed and thus quiet. However, the added bonus is that this latter group will become fearful of making the wrong choices or decisions in their actions because they have the exemplification of their neighbors becoming disenfranchised to warn them of what could possibly happen to them. From this postulation, Machiavelli draws an interesting and conclusive maxim: "People should either be caressed or crushed. If you do them minor damage they will get their revenge; but if you cripple them there is nothing they can do. If you need to injure someone, do it in such a way that you do not have to fear their vengeance" (425). If you do decide to settle the new land through the use of armies, then you run the chance of incurring a lot more expenditure and simply maintaining the army will dry up any revenues that you collect from the new territory. In other words, the profit of a new land now becomes an economic loss. Once this become true, the army Ð'- unlike the colonies Ð'- will create more enemies than it will allies because your new citizens suffer at their hands by having their lives constantly disrupted. Thus, both the ruler and the citizenry suffer and it is therefore evident that establishing colonies in the new territory is the better option of having armies settle the land.

Machiavelli also takes it as a given that once you have settled this territory and established your allies you should then pursue conquering other weaker states within the vicinity and let them become attached and dependent on you. After all, if you represent salvation from their current circumstances, they can't help but fall at your feet. At the same time, he argues that a ruler should