nikolo Machiavelli is perhaps history's original villain for good enough reason Machiavelli abandoned traditional morals he rejected Christianity and he ripped apart goodness at its very foundation in its place Nicolo Machiavelli created a structured system of ruthlessness and deceit Machiavelli offers a tangled web of contradictions profound truths villainous advocacy and single-minded determination but by looking beyond the now famous brand of Machiavelli you can find some grim and relevant truths about the world we live in today and how to function within that world to understand at all the philosophy of Machiavelli you do need to understand his
life and to a degree the times he grew up in these times were marked by political instability and societal chaos Niccolo Machiavelli was born in Florence in 1469 came from a wealthy family but his father Bernardo was the poorest of that family Bernardo was a former lawyer mostly unemployed who had a good network of relationships but not much to show for kibelli's father was skeptical of religion or at least as skeptical as one could be in his era his mother meanwhile was a devout woman who spent her time writing religious poems and hymns this combination
of religious skepticism and talented writer would certainly form the basis for Machiavelli's later work time Florence was a republic on paper anyways the Florentine government consisted of eight priori who were all led by one sort of prime minister every two months these people would be elected via a lottery system from the names of well-to-do respectable Florentine men in theory this allowed a constant changing of power so that no single profession or geographic area could seize control entirely or permanently in practice the system was an absolute disaster every two months there were wholesale changes to government
approach and priorities so the ruling Medici family had stepped in they manipulated the lottery system ensuring that all eligible names were friendly and would tow the Medici line in reality Florence was functioning like something of a dictatorship this level of corruption wasn't really rare in Italy rather it was closer to the norm than an exception Wars raged around Europe for territory Italian mercenary government leaders changed sides the drop of a hat this is all to say Machiavelli grew up in a society where the idea and the reality of how things operated were wildly Divergent he
had a front row seat to political dysfunction and Corruption meanwhile he learned from a young age the price of failing as a politician near his ninth birthday conspirators against the Medici family were hung upside down from the government's main building and left there for weeks to rot this combination of corruption and brutality were seemingly formative in Machiavelli's later career people don't really know much about Machiavelli's early life but he did achieve a significant level of Education after the Medici family was pushed from power in 1494 Machiavelli was appointed to a Florentine government office where he
authored government documents shortly thereafter Machiavelli earned himself a couple of promotions he was appointed to Second Chancery which was one of two key State departments in Florence he also became Secretary of the Ten of War this was a committee that dealt with foreign relations and War preparations Machiavelli was just 28. to this day no one knows how he earned such high posts at such a young age there are no documents or records to indicate any special experience that would have deserved these promotions people often downplay Machiavelli as a failed politician which perhaps later will be
true but isn't entirely correct for over a decade he was Florence's top Diplomat while his work did not produce any truly remarkable results this was probably through no fault of his own Florence was the weakest of the main Italian States during a truly tumultuous period to that point in 1512 the Florentine Republic was overthrown and the Medici family returned to power suspecting Machiavelli of conspiracy the medicis imprisoned tortured and exiled him the following year it was there in Exile that Machiavelli produced his most famous work the prince was not the only thing Machiavelli wrote but
it's his most famous and most influential so we'll be looking at Machiavelli's philosophy predominantly but not entirely through the lens of this book the prince was meant to be a guide for a ruler indeed it was written expressly for Lorenzo Medici head of the Medici family and we'll talk more about that later for a long time the prevailing philosophy said that the measure of a Leader's greatness was by his goodness his moral character this was certainly not always put into practice but it was the ideal in the prince Machiavelli tossed that out entirely he said
that for a leader all that mattered was concentrating and keeping one's power being good was not the measure of a Leader's success but rather building a great nation in this way Machiavelli divorced entirely political Theory from ethics the book is not a manual for living but rather a manual for keeping one's political power for being an effective leader in this Pursuit Machiavelli rejected Christianity and placed very little value on traditional morals more precisely he argued that morality was fine but a person simply couldn't always act morally and Be an Effective politician this took courage perhaps
cruelty in a dark sort of boldness but courage nevertheless Machiavelli could have padded his messages he could have said oh you have to do all of this to stay in power and that's why power isn't really good could have expressed a disdain for the type of person he believed could hold on to power in writing this way Machiavelli could have eliminated a great deal of criticism and controversy while still fundamentally delivering the same messages but instead in this short volume Machiavelli systematically rips apart morality and instead constructs a deeply troubling and at times profoundly accurate
assessment of the world cesare Borgia was the son of Pope Alexander VI with his father's help Borgia was building himself a new Italian State near Florence in 1502. Borgia conquered the city of chesina and immediately went off to go continue his work in his place Borgia ordered his right-hand man Ramiro delorca to bring order to chesina told delorca to do whatever he wanted be as ruthless as cruel as horrific as he needed to be delorca obeyed he beheaded men in front of their families he seized property he castrated anyone who went against this rule after
this version of Peace was established Borgia went to Chestnut himself Borgia learned that of course the people of the town now hated delorca and by extension hated him too after all delorca had just spent a few months killing people's fathers castrating their brothers and abusing their wives so one night borja had his men sliced the lorca's body in two pieces place these two pieces along with his severed head on a stick in the middle of town square the next morning the townspeople awoke and saw Dolores mutilated remains on full display being that they hated the
Lorca the people were pretty happy about this Borgia addressed his citizens with flagrant deceit told them that delorca had usurped power and acted entirely on his own volition that Borgia had never granted him the right to commit such atrocities he said that delorca was a Savage sadistic psychopath Borgia told the people that he had saved them from this monster and that dolorka's level of Cruelty and Disobedience simply couldn't be allowed in the Great Society that he was trying to build it was a ruthless severe and underhanded double cross from Borgia committed against one of his
closest comrades throughout the prince Machiavelli expresses a deep admiration for cesare Borgia he exalts Borgia as basically the ideal leader you see Machiavelli believed that goodness was fine it was great to be good even but you could not be an effective leader and be good all of the time for Machiavelli politics was an unending Knife Fight It inherently required ruthlessness he says a leader cannot always be compassionate loyal Humane and honest because the very nature of the role requires you to be cruel disloyal inhumane and dishonest Machiavelli presents the question should one be loved or
feared his answer is revealing he says that it would be great to be both but they don't always go together and broadly it's safer to be feared rather than loved Machiavelli says people are unreliable some are cowards some lie some can be bought some just change their mind these things will happen he says no matter how much these people claim to love you but fear Machiavelli argues that is permanent punishment is a tangibly threatening thing that keeps people permanently in line you can get over love can change your mind it's much more difficult to get
over fear indeed Machiavelli argues that you can't control what or how people love but you can control what they fear it's a fine line though fear is good but Machiavelli maintains that a leader should never for any reason be hated hatred of later he said is what inspired assassinations and conspiracies if you have to engage in violence if you have to be cruel do it quickly do it quietly it was not to create hatred amongst your people be loved when possible be feared when not but never ever be hated that was a successful politician for
Machiavelli nikolo Machiavelli was also happy to cast aside honesty he recognizes that it's admirable to be honest sure but he argues it's simply not effective by outwitting one's opponents Machiavelli said the cunning leader more effective than the honest leader he says that it's okay to lie to go back on your word to deceive people or even stab them in the back circumstances change and so must your commitments it's not ethical but this is what it takes to maintain power and build a great nation Machiavelli argues that people will lie to you so what obligation do
you have to be truthful to them in being honest you're giving your opponents an advantage you're refusing a weapon that you know they will have this disregard for honesty expresses itself further while Machiavelli maintains that you don't really need to have virtuous qualities the great leader needs to appear to have them you see Machiavelli says it takes two things to win the people's adoration appearances and results most people he says will only know a leader through his words very few individuals will ever see what goes on behind closed doors and so your constituents will judge
you based only on what they see not anything that they experience the things you say need to feel inspired by virtues because that's how people will judge you of course he goes on to say they will also judge your achievements based on results results at methods you won't always be able to get results through honesty kindness or any other virtue that's just not how the game is played and so we have the house that Machiavelli built or at least the one that is so famous not inherently or always cruel but so willing to be cruel
willing to deceive to lie and to hurt It Is marred by cynicism or perhaps as he would say realism multiple times in his writings Machiavelli declares people to be unreliable dishonest and selfish and so you need to be these things too but to reduce Machiavelli down to these terms is kind of inaccurate among his writings there are profound truths perhaps worryingly profound [Music] Machiavelli famously rejected Christianity as a legitimate way to deal with life's problems in the prince he derisively writes I realize that many people have believed and still do believe that the world is
run by God and by fortune and that whoever shrewd men may be I can't do anything about it and have no way of protecting themselves in these words Machiavelli sort of scoffs at the idea of God running our world and controlling our Fates in a way it's tremendously inspirational you have agency over your life not God now go do something with that agency as ever Machiavelli takes a practical approach his approach to not just politics but life itself is a battle between Veer 2 and Fortuna throughout his book The Prince Machiavelli relies on the concept
of virtue of course the word itself brings to mind virtue but that would be an incorrect translation Machiavelli wasn't interested in the simple dichotomy of good and evil but rather the Pursuits of success over failure and the need for strength over weakness really there's no great single word translation for the idea of veer 2. prowess comes to mind as does strength of character but viewer 2 is perhaps any trait that allows you to achieve your desires it could be Talent boldness bravery will cunning intelligence or any number of other specific skills broadly it is something
that inspires a sense of agency with Veer 2 you can be truly great in life virtue is pitted against Fortuna Machiavelli says for tuna here is a more straightforward concept it is Fortune look Machiavelli tells us that Fortuna basically decides half of what we do the other half is up to us and our fear too it makes the analogy of a river that routinely floods a plane destroying a village and killing its people that is Fortuna but we can do something with this Fortuna we can build Banks and dams so that the river can flood
all at once and the people will not be harmed this is the meeting of fortuna and virtue Fortune he says wields power only in places you allow it to with preparation through fear 2 you can at least be ready to meet Fortune when it arrives conversely a person can be successful One Day by doing X Y and Z then fail the next day doing the exact same thing this is because Fortuna changes this way Machiavelli tells us we must be ready to adapt keep your approach in step with your circumstances in so many words adapt
or die nikolo Machiavelli believed there was a Beast Within man that beneath whatever morals we espouse or even act out there is something else within us there's an animal that wants nothing more than to fulfill desire and will do anything it must to achieve these ends perhaps he was ahead of his time a psychologist Carl Young would later refer to something like this as the shadow while Freud may consider it the subconscious much like these men Machiavelli insisted that we don't suppress this Beast nor do we let it take control but we must instead learn
how to work with it be ethical be kind and be just whenever you can but in the pursuit of a goal being like the Beast Be Like The Lion who can scare away hyenas be like the fox who is too cunning to fall into traps playing by the laws morals and methods of man will only get you so far Machiavelli offers profound Insight when he discusses another dichotomy the way the world should be versus the way the world is this Insight I feel is perhaps the most chillingly accurate in all of his writings he says
there is an enormous glaring gap between these two things if you conduct yourself in a way that is in accordance with what the world should be rather than the way that it is you are authoring your own destruction Machiavelli basically says the world is not a Utopia there's goodness in it but it is not wholly good there are traps lies and threats you need to be wary of these things you need to function in a way that provides resilience in the face of these realities live in accordance with how the world is not how you
think it ought to be this I think more than categorizations of villainy or evil gets to the core of the Machiavellian philosophy still for all his insights when we try to put Machiavellian principles into practice we do run into some problems Machiavelli wrote The Prince as a gift to Lorenzo Medici the head of the Medici family it was an attempt to earn medici's trust and favor and basically get himself a job mind you Machiavelli did this after the medicis had him imprisoned tortured and exiled Machiavelli never got his job Lorenzo probably never even read the
prince but even if he had I think Machiavelli still wouldn't have gotten the job of all people Machiavelli should have understood that his ideas were maybe just publishing them could fuel only an author's career not one of a politician Machiavelli's work is self-defeating look at the things he advocates for deceit backstabbing cruelty opportunism why would you ever want this man in your inner circle How Could You willingly invite him into any meaningful position Machiavelli's principles when broadcast anyways become incredibly anti-social and perhaps even counterproductive at the very least Machiavelli sacrificed himself to espouse his ideology
who would read The Prince and want to be anywhere near Nicolo Machiavelli well the answer to that was demonstrably no one You could argue that you'd rather have him on your side than the other guys but while not an entirely failed politician Machiavelli never Rose to any significant positions of power he never drafted any constitutions he never let any revolutions and he was never in charge of any cities or countries for all of his theorizing Machiavelli never seemed to put his ideas into practice with huge efficacy indeed there are no records of him ever doing
anything that was machiavellen of course he also advocates for secrecy and cunning so perhaps Nikola Machiavelli just managed to hide things from history but historical record does not shine brightly on his life outside of authorship after the prince's failure Machiavelli fell back into a life of womanizing he fell in and out of love quite routinely and pursued little more than his romantic desires Machiavelli went on to write sexual comedic plays which earned him undeniable and immediate celebrity but he wanted to be in politics eventually Machiavelli was called upon by a Medici cousin for advice on
a looming French and Spanish conflict Machiavelli was given the task of overseeing Florence's defensive walls when the fight came the Spanish Army simply bypassed Florence altogether instead they sacked Rome quite easily the Medici family collapsed once again and Machiavelli was out of favor and unemployed he got ill and Niccolo Machiavelli died within a month his political career was largely insignificant but still Machiavelli's Legacy is strong his rioting undeniably put a stamp on history the prince was not published during Machiavelli's life but when it did appear in print an English Cardinal declared that it had been
written by quote Satan's finger then Pope Paul IV banned the book immediately in France conflicts between the Protestant huguenots and Catholics threatened to rip the country apart the nation was under the rule of Charles IX but he was sickly and young in reality his mother Catherine Medici was the one pulling the strings his mother who was an Italian Florentine and the daughter of Lorenzo Medici the very man to which the prince had been originally dedicated in the Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre a 1572 thousands of huguenots were murdered and Catherine was held to blame one would
have been victim you know jaunty lay escaped and wrote a work that firmly established Machiavelli as a villain in history the book described Catherine as a compulsive reader of Machiavelli and characterized the author as representative of a cruel villainous Italian identity the writings pulled Machiavelli's work from its context and readers were convinced that they understood the philosophy in truth what they read was a hodgepodge of Machiavellian ideas that seemed to embrace brutality and advocated for the rejection of virtue entirely but this was the version of Machiavelli that became democratized Jean delay's work was translated into
Latin and then English well before the prince itself existed in English this version of Machiavelli's writing moved from intellectual Elites into popular culture the character of a cruel machiavellan archetype leaked into famous plays in literature so Machiavelli's name became synonymous with evil in truth Machiavelli's thesis was only that Christian morals and effective political leadership were not always compatible I think most people today would probably agree with this sentiment while the tide never really turned on Machiavelli his philosophy has been embraced by politicians the world over it should be said that these politicians were not exclusively
moral or amoral leaders not exclusively authoritarian or permissive whether he predicted it or caused it or some combination of the two Machiavelli's writings describe modern political machinations almost perfectly today's politicians must and do maintain a facade of morality and hopefully act on it when possible but in reality there is certainly a divorce between ethics and political Ambitions no matter where you stand politically I think we can all agree this is mostly true I personally don't find the early political discussion around Machiavelli entirely compelling rather I think that examining his opinions on life the world and
how to operate within it reveal Timeless wisdom wisdom that sometimes we'd rather not accept I find myself resistant to much of the cynicism offered by Machiavelli certainly I would never aspire to be like cesare Borgia nor would I want a leader like him either in fact I believe people to be inherently good but presented with this I am sure nikolo Machiavelli would laugh in my face you would say I am playing right into what he warns against Machiavelli would tell me I am living how I think the world should be not how it really is
this way there is a single-minded determination to Machiavelli's writings doesn't care one way or the other about being a good person doesn't care about any God he doesn't care about friends instead his philosophy cares only about one thing power I suppose there is something admirable to such determination even if it isn't wholly relevant to every individual like all great villains Machiavelli is dangerous it is dangerous to subscribe wholesale to his ideas and indeed it is perhaps equally dangerous to ignore them completely
