11. New Modes and Orders: Machiavelli's The Prince (chaps. 13-26)

Machiavelli's Revolutionary Ideas on Virtue and Morality

Machiavelli as a Reformer of Moral Vocabulary

• Professor Steven Smith introduces Machiavelli as both a revolutionary and a reformer, aiming to transform the moral vocabulary surrounding virtue and vice.

• He emphasizes that Machiavelli seeks to shift from Platonic or Christian ideals towards a more worldly understanding of power, associating virtue (virtù) with manliness, force, and ambition.

The Concept of "Dirty Hands"

• Smith discusses the political philosophy concept known as "dirty hands," suggesting that engaging in politics requires one to be prepared for morally questionable actions.

• To teach princes how not to be good, Machiavelli argues for examining the roots of morality found in religion, despite its seeming absence in The Prince.

Appearance vs. Reality in Religion

• In Chapter 18 of The Prince, Machiavelli advises princes to cultivate the appearance of religious virtues rather than practicing them genuinely.

• This notion parallels Plato's discussions on justice, where having the appearance of being just is deemed more important than actual justice.

Contrasting Moral Codes: Christian vs. Pagan

• Transitioning to his Discourses on Livy, Smith highlights a significant chapter contrasting Christian morality with pagan values regarding liberty and boldness.

• Machiavelli attributes differences in attitudes toward liberty between ancient peoples and his contemporaries to variations in moral education—pagan worldliness versus Christian innocence.

Implications of Religious Education

• The core conflict within Machiavelli’s moral code lies between worldliness and innocence shaped by differing educational systems.

• He critiques Christianity for glorifying humility over action-oriented virtues like strength and boldness, arguing this has weakened political resilience.

• According to Machiavelli, Christianity’s emphasis on suffering undermines qualities necessary for defending political liberty, leading society towards weakness.

Machiavelli's Insights on Religion and Civic Virtue

The Role of Religion in Society

• Machiavelli argues that the decline in love for freedom has led to fewer republics today compared to ancient times, attributing this change to a shift in societal values.

• He references Livy's account of Rome's founding, highlighting Numa's role in establishing justice and religion as essential components for reestablishing Rome after its initial violent beginnings.

• Machiavelli emphasizes that religion should be evaluated based on its societal consequences rather than its truth content, suggesting a pragmatic approach to faith.

The Function of Religion in Governance

• At Rome's founding, religion was necessary to temper the aggressive nature of the Romans; however, Machiavelli believes modern society requires religion to instill a fighting spirit against threats to liberty.

• He posits that a good republic relies on citizens' ability to defend their freedoms through their own means ("one's own arms") rather than solely depending on divine intervention.

Lessons from Biblical Narratives

• In his retelling of David and Goliath, Machiavelli alters the story by adding a knife, symbolizing the need for practical preparation alongside faith—"trust in God's promises but bring a knife just in case."

• This alteration reflects Machiavelli’s belief that reliance on one's capabilities is crucial for success and survival.

Education and Civic Responsibility

• Machiavelli expresses concern over Italy’s lack of martial virtues through his poetry, advocating for education that fosters civic spirit and readiness for conflict.

• He argues that prolonged peace weakens people; thus, education must compensate for natural deficiencies by cultivating strength through struggle.

Morality and Power Dynamics

• To achieve liberty, one must understand how not to adhere strictly to Christian virtues like humility; instead, one must be prepared to act decisively when necessary.

• The true statesman blends love for the common good with an understanding of when cruelty may be required—a concept he refers to as "cruelty well used," which can serve as a virtue under certain circumstances.

Machiavelli's Political Philosophy and the Problem of Dirty Hands

The Nature of Political Responsibility

• Machiavelli emphasizes that political life requires acceptance of moral complexities, including cruelty and deceit. Those unwilling to engage in these harsh realities should refrain from politics.

• The presidency of Jimmy Carter is cited as an example where high-minded morality conflicted with statecraft necessities, illustrating the dangers of imposing personal ethics on political decisions.

The Problem of Dirty Hands

• This concept, known as the "problem of dirty hands," highlights the conflict between moral purity and the demands of political action. Machiavelli acknowledges the admirable desire for moral integrity but distinguishes it from political morality.

• In Sartre's play, a communist resistance fighter challenges an idealistic recruit about the impracticality of governing innocently, suggesting that purity is not suitable for those involved in governance.

Realism vs. Idealism in Politics

• John le Carré’s novel "The Spy Who Came in from the Cold" presents a British spy who reveals to his idealistic lover that politics is governed by expediency rather than moral considerations.

• Both Sartre's and le Carré’s narratives illustrate a form of faux Machiavellianism—intellectual discussions on losing innocence regarding political realities without fully embracing Machiavelli's insights.

Understanding Machiavelli's Perspective

• A critical question arises: Was Machiavelli truly a proponent of ruthless power dynamics? His writings suggest he aimed to reveal deeper truths about human nature and governance rather than merely advocating for tyranny.

Types of Government According to Machiavelli

• In "The Prince," Machiavelli identifies two main types of regimes: principalities and republics, each influenced by contrasting psychological dispositions or "humors."

• He describes two classes within society—the powerful ("grandi") who wish to dominate and the common people ("popolo") who seek freedom from oppression, highlighting inherent societal conflicts.

Machiavelli's View on Nobility and the People

The Role of Nobility vs. the People

• Machiavelli critiques the virtues of nobility, suggesting that their ambitions lead to oppression, while the people's desire is simply not to be oppressed.

• In a reversal of classical views by Plato and Aristotle, Machiavelli argues that it is the nobles who are fickle and unpredictable, contrasting with the reliability of the people.

• He posits that a hostile populace may only abandon a prince, whereas hostile nobles pose a greater threat by potentially acting against him.

• The primary task for government is managing elite ambition; princes must control noble pride through strategic actions like public executions and political trials.

• An example from Cesare Borgia illustrates how executing Remirro d'Orco effectively subdued noble ambition while winning popular support.

Understanding People's Decency and Political Responsibility

• Machiavelli acknowledges the essential decency of people but distinguishes this from goodness; he warns against their potential descent into idleness or license.

• He emphasizes that people need education to defend their liberty, criticizing Christianity for weakening their political responsibility over centuries.

• Princes must not only manage noble ambitions but also cultivate common people's desires for freedom and responsibility in governance.

Interpretations of Machiavelli's Intentions

• Some scholars view "The Prince" as a warning about princely power; Spinoza suggests it alerts citizens to be cautious in trusting rulers.

• Rousseau describes Machiavelli as an honorable man who disguised his love for freedom due to his ties with oppressive powers like the Medici family.

• Both thinkers interpret Machiavelli as subtly advocating for popular sovereignty against aristocratic rule.

Challenging Classical Political Concepts

• Machiavelli challenges traditional notions where republic governance was seen as best led by wealthy elites capable of sound judgment.

• He redirects power towards the people, arguing they are more reliable than nobles, thus reshaping political dynamics in favor of broader societal involvement.

Machiavelli's Political Philosophy and Its Implications

The Role of the People in Governance

• Machiavelli emphasizes that once people value their liberty and oppose encroachments on their freedom, they become a strong foundation for the greatness of a state.

• A prince aligned with his people's interests is more likely to achieve civil stability and personal glory; adaptability to changing times is crucial for both princes and their advisers.

The Legacy of Great Princes

• Machiavelli cites historical figures like Moses as exemplary leaders who established laws and prepared citizens for self-governance.

• The conclusion of The Prince calls for Italians to liberate themselves from foreign invaders, highlighting a patriotic sentiment.

Machiavelli's Break from Tradition

• He sought to free politics from religious control, advocating that politics should be worldly and not bound by transcendent moral laws.

• Machiavelli introduces a new populism, contrasting with classical thinkers who favored aristocratic governance based on education and virtue.

Vision of a New Republic

• He envisions a modern republic characterized by conflict, war, and expansion rather than peace—a stark departure from traditional ideals.

• This aggressive nature mirrors historical patterns in American expansionism, suggesting that such behavior may be inherent in republican regimes.

Amoral Realism in Politics

• Machiavelli’s perspective implies that all social goods are often established through morally questionable means; he challenges readers to reflect on this reality.

• His philosophy promotes an amoral realism where political actions are justified by necessity—"by whatever means necessary" becomes his guiding principle.

• He claims to reveal truths about political science previously obscured by ancient writers' allegories, advocating for transparency in political discourse.