on the origin of my philosophy & an
800 word summary ofmachiavelli's realism
The basis of my philosophy is realism. Many have contributed to this field of thought. I find Machiavelli's writings the most compelling and practical.
The Prince is his most famous text. It is not a book. It was a personal letter, carrying the intent to get his job back. In this sense, The Prince is the longest cover letter ever written. Like Meditations by Aurelius, he did not intend this to be published. His aim was not fame or to contribute to the field of realism. The Prince was the truest expression of his expertise.
PERHAPS NO WORK IN HISTORY HAS OCCASIONED MORE CONTROVERSY, OR RENDERED THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR MORE GENERALLY ODIOUS, THAN THE PRINCE.
Machiavelli wrote about power, predation, temptation, simulated virtue, reckless ambition, and hypocrisy in a way that no one else ever had - with honesty. His project was not to engage in an endless regurgitation to paint himself as a moral arbiter and everyone else as immoral, as everyone else had before him and continued to do so after. He wanted to actually understand how power is gained, used, and lost. He observed that power was never held by a perfectly moral ruler, and that all power was deployed in a contested arena.
Yet, for this honesty, people speak of Machiavelli as if he were the Grinch.
He is treated as if these behaviors would have never come into being if it were not for him putting pen to paper.
This is the popular story of Machiavelli. And I disagree. For the same reasons and in the same way that a doctor is not guilty for talking about the behavior of cancer cells, their causes, and their cures.
I am not alone in my view of Machiavelli, however. Because my view of Machiavelli is the same as the inscription above his resting place: tanto nomini nullum par elogium, so great a name has no adequate praise.
Machiavelli showed us how kings, dictators, and presidents thought. He showed us how democracy turns to anarchy, how aristocracy turns to kleptocracy, and how monarchy turns to autocracy. That every virtuous form of government is a twin to its vice. He showed us that the business of States, or politics, is often ugly, and that we ought examine the actions of leaders through a different moral lens.
As a general example that is evidenced throughout Machiavelli’s work – a good state does not test its rulers principally for morality, but rather capability, competence, and effectiveness. A complete lack of morality will be harmful, because the people will not accept it; similarly, an absence of the willingness towards violence will either invite a willingly violent tyranny internally or subjugation externally. Leaders must know when to follow rules, when to set them, and when, themselves, to break them in order to maintain higher rules for the State.
The goal of the leader, and politician, is to take and maintain power, and to secure their State. The goal of the State, and by extension, its people, is to test those leaders principally on capability, competence, and effectiveness. Everything else is secondary, not by choice, but by definition. And if you flip that definition, you don’t achieve your moral goals – you simply lose capability, competence, and effectiveness.
To test this theory, ask yourself - How can you be charitable without the ability to create wealth? How can you create safety for anyone without the ability to project power? How can you defend your community against lions, or wolves, or both, without strength and cunning. Machiavelli said the leader must be both a lion and a wolf, in order to have both the strength to fight or frighten off foes, and have the wit and cunning to recognize and avoid traps.
Ought implies can. This view is also consistent with Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and many others.
This is political realism and political first principles of all States, from monarchies to democracies. But this is not a treatise of despair but one of hope, because as Machiavelli himself said:
A return to first principles in a republic is sometimes caused by the simple virtues of one individual. Their good example has such an influence that the good people strive to imitate them, and the wicked are ashamed to lead a life so contrary to their example.
Like Machiavelli, I am an advisor, and in the 21st century political bodies have substantially less power. Some businesses have the economic power of nations. Many have the economic power of cities. Machiavelli's wisdom, therefore, is more applicable to the Business than to the State.