Editor in Chief: Moh. Reza Huwaida Friday, March 29th, 2024

A Prince Ought to Choose the Fox and the Lion; Machiavelli

|

A Prince Ought to Choose the Fox and the Lion; Machiavelli

“Men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.

Above all things he must keep his hands off the property of others, because men more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony.

Not only is man fickle, cowardly, ungrateful, covetous and disloyal, but they’re they’ll forgive you for killing their father before they’ll forgive taking their inheritance!”

These quotes show two aspects of Machiavellian realism. First, it is a very negative view on human nature. Second, it is pragmatic. If you are a prince, if you are a leader, and you do not recognize the evil inherent in men, and do not take into account the fact that you may be required to inspire fear in order to preserve the state and its security, you will fail. Power will be held by those most ruthless, that is simply a fact. If you want power, you must play that game; otherwise you will bring ruin not only to yourself, but also to your people.

Yet you cannot be as brutal and obscene as to turn the people against you. You should be feared, but not hated. Keep your word when you can – it is good to be considered trustworthy, but understand when you should lie or deceive. Don’t execute innocent people if you don’t have to, but know that at times it might be necessary. Create the illusion that you are virtuous and noble, but in reality break from that when you must.

Note that this is pragmatic perspective; you have to do what is necessary to succeed. Consider this quote:

A prince, therefore, being compelled knowingly to adopt the beast, ought to choose the fox and the lion; because the lion cannot defend himself against snares and the fox cannot defend himself against wolves. Therefore, it is necessary to be a fox to discover the snares and a lion to terrify the wolves.

According to Machiavelli, a leader has to deal with the realities of deception and power politics. He sees is what happened in Pistoia, a town lies near Florence, and what is happening in Italy in general, and considers it folly to think it virtuous to try to be moral in the affairs of state. The moral man will lose out to a ruthless one.

Machiavelli is known as being an archetypical realist. By that I mean someone who says that we should not try to figure out how people should be, but to accept and deal with the world as it actually is.

Machiavelli is introducing the “is/ought” distinction, and doing so in a way that dismisses the traditional form of political philosophy – thinking about what ought to be – as perhaps interesting, but not very useful. Trying to live by what ought to be in ignorance of what actually is will only lead to ruin.

Interestingly, there are similarities between Plato and Machiavelli – each saw their state in crisis, culturally strong but declining in power and becoming susceptible to outside force. Plato took the idealist route: what kind of republic would be strong and virtuous, and avoid the moral decay destroying Athens from within? Machiavelli the realist route: what is the pragmatic way to be able to fend off foes and restore order and stability? For that you don’t need a philosopher king, you need a prince, a leader who understands what it takes to lead.

Such a prince, Machiavelli argues, must learn not to be limited by morality when necessary. A leader has to be able to use lies, force, and deception if needed in the world that is. The reason for this is clear when Machiavelli addresses the question of whether it be better to be feared or loved.

“Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life, and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you.”

People are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, and covetous. You can’t trust them. They will turn on you. Human nature means that doing what you ought to do according to some moral code simply puts you at a disadvantage because humans, by their nature, are usually willing to throw out such moral concerns if it is to their advantage.

In fact, it is not Hitlerian or in favor of someone like Stalin, even though Stalin’s rise to power in the Soviet Union has been called “Machiavellian” as he ruthlessly and without morality pursued his own personal power. Machiavelli, in fact, would look at Stalin’s rise as an example of why men of virtue must adopt his methods; if not, then only men of evil will succeed. For Machiavelli the ends justify the means, but the ends themselves are not simply power for power’s sake. Rather, anarchy must be averted, and a prince must protect his subjects and create conditions for stability, peace, and prosperity. The ends are noble, but due to human nature – greed, avarice, and weakness – you need to do whatever it takes to achieve those ends.

Since Niccolo Machiavelli was Chancellor of the Florence Republic, the premier city of renaissance Italy, he, I believe, was influenced by the crisis; but don’t you see a close resemblance between his idea and our society? Do you think that many politicians choose fox and lion and for them also ends justify the means? It is better the readers pass their judgment. 

Hujjatullah Zia is an emerging writer of Daily Outlook Afghanistan. He can be reached at zia_hujjat@yahoo.com

Go Top