How Did Machiavelli's View Of Government

The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli, and Meditations by Marcus Aurelius)

When history is recounted, who are the names that will stand for centuries to come? Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, George Washington, Hitler; all men who at one point in time were leaders. They did their job so well that the names are still commonplace around the world. The great philosopher Plato thought the leaders of a society should be philosophers, philosopher kings. They have rigorous education steps and have to find true meaning in life. Political science, as the topic was described by Aristotle, is social science dealing with the study of the state, nation, government. Niccolò Machiavelli is a renowned political scientist and author of The Prince. He studied

The knowledge of past forms of states and regimes gave him an insight into the way to best govern a people. “Machiavelli's vision of government is based on the individual power of a prince or other ruler. In The Prince (1513) he argues that a ruler must be willing to defy ordinary morality, if necessary, to preserve the state. In his view, the prince must be ready to rule by fear rather than love and to focus on military capability.”(Political Thought) Machiavelli was writing his work to a prince, Lorenzo he Magnificent, as a gift of knowledge, saying: “So it is necessary to be a prince to know thoroughly the nature of the people, and one of the populace to know the nature of princes.”(Machiavelli, The Prince) Unlike Plato, Machiavelli preferred the method of instilling fear in subjects as a ruler. The common thing about both of these philosophers is they never actually lead anyone. They both looked at systems of government around them at their respective epochs to come to conclusions about the proper way to rule a group. While Plato really insisted on a proper education with intentionality, Machiavelli looked at the history that he had access to. The Prince was written and distributed around the sixteenth century Common Era, nearly two thousand years after Plato wrote his Republic. Machiavelli saw many things; what made civilizations like Rome and Greece rise and fall, what brought their downfalls, and

Marcus Aurelius was an emperor of Rome, the greatest civilization in the world at one time, so he might have an easier time saying things about leadership. This causes, Plato and Machiavelli, to receive some criticisms about their literary works. How can a man who has never been in charge of anything critique leaders and the role of leadership, they don’t have the experience to be saying anything about leadership. Machiavelli, some argue, did study how others lead and what the outcome was. He studied the history of many leaders and their subjects, but that is not the same as actually leading. They did not have to make the choice to kill the perpetrator of the law; they just sit back and contemplate about what they would have done in a position of leadership. Marcus Aurelius on the other hand was born into and taught how to be a leader from the time he could walk. In Meditations it starts with a thank-you note. He thanks the people in his life who have taught him something about life and being a good person. “In my father I observed mildness of temper, and unchangeable resolution in the things which he had determined after due deliberation; and no vainglory in those things which men call honours; and a love of labour and perseverance; and a readiness to listen to those who had anything to propose for the common weal;”(Marcus Aurelius,