Truth is there probably isn't any. However, this is something
that Niccolo Machiavelli might have argued with. Machiavelli believed that
leaders should do whatever is necessary to accomplish political or leadership
driven tasks. In his book The Prince
Machiavelli said “it is better to be feared than be loved; for, in general, men
are ungrateful, inconstant, hypocritical … and covetous of gain.” This mirrors
some of my own characteristics when I served as a leader during my LDS mission.
Although it isn't okay to lie, cheat, or do anything immoral to accomplish any task
at hand, sometimes you must make the task at hand the first priority, ahead of
being friends with your fellow missionaries, coworkers, or employees to be sure that it is completed
successfully. Much of my leadership experience during my LDS mission tippy-toed
close to some of the aspects of being a “Machiavellian”, which some might argue isn't the best approach, but given the successful work that took place during
these efforts it is fair to say that Niccolo Machiavelli had a point in his
political ideas.
Machiavelli also brought
forth main stream Renaissance ideas into the political sphere. His book The Prince, which focuses on what it
takes to be a strong leader, had the intent to help unite the Italian city
states because they were weak compared to surrounding countries that had a more
unified state set up. In a political way this continued the celebration of
individualism which was a recurring theme of the Renaissance. Although
Machiavelli wanted the city states to be united it was not so much a communal
idea as it was a unifying of Italian states from the rest of the world. This is
the same type of individualism that is more easily present with the art and poetry
of the time.
I appreciate your analysis, I think you did it very well. However, I will have to politely disagree that machiavelli was a good example of renaissance. Under the idea of renaissance as a rebirth, I think there wasn't much new brought to politics. They were always scheming people looking to place themselves in the best situation.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand I do agree that in many interactions today we do need to recognize that being someone's friend is not the ultimate goal, but business (or whatever line you are in) is.
I think it's always interesting to look at Machiavelli's ideas, because on the surface some of them seem like great ideas, and some people cling onto them as excuses, like, "It is better to be feared than loved." I think it was this mastery of rhetoric that lets him spread the ideas of the period, like you said.
ReplyDeleteYes, those ideas did exist before, but renaissance as rebirth assumes that something already existed in order to be reborn. In that sense, he may not have brought something new to the table, but he did rebirth old ideas in new lights.
ReplyDeleteAs a side note, I've always found it interesting that the authors of the Declaration of Independence chose to brand the King of England as a "Prince." I've wondered if that came from Machiavellian thinking. Any thoughts?