When I began writing about “The Prince”, I mentioned that I thought it would be interesting to see if it would yield any insights into the fall of Pablo Escobar. Well, with the benefit of hindsight, and given that there are so many points made in “The Prince”, of course it can. It’s a bit silly, really, but here are some of the ideas from “The Prince” illustrated by Escobar’s life.
Today we look back at Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. I think that once you filter out the thinly-veiled attempts to get a job, and skip over the notorious (but not really that shocking) “pragmatism” of the book, you’re left with some pretty interesting ideas. I highlight the ones that I found most striking below.
Today we look at the twenty-sixth (and last) chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This chapter is an “Exhortation to Liberate Italy from the Barbarians”, and (unlike the rest of the book) cannot be understood out of context, which in this case is that N.M. addressed “The Prince” to a specific ruler (Lorenzo II) at a specific time, in the somewhat pedestrian hope of securing employment.
Today we look at the twenty-fifth chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This chapter discusses “How Much Fortune Can Do in Human Affairs, and How It May Be Opposed”, and is surprisingly ambiguous and, contrary to its claims, fatalistic in its verdict.
Today we look at the twenty-fourth chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This chapter explains “Why the Princes of Italy Have Lost Their States”, and you will not be surprised to learn that N.M. attributes this turn of events to the failure of those princes to respect the principles he has outlined so far.
Today we look at the twenty-third chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This chapter discusses “How Flatterers Must Be Shunned”, and “How” is the critical word; N.M. does not merely argue that it is a good idea to discourage flattery, he argues that there is a right way and a wrong way to do it.
Today we look at the twenty-second chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This brief chapter is “Of the Secretaries of Princes”, and makes two points: First, that a man may be known by his lieutenants, and second, that if a prince and his minister are to work well together, each must think of the welfare of the other.
Since we’re within measurable distance of the end of “The Prince”, I’m casting about for the next subject for Book Club. I’m considering (among others) Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”. Stopping off at WikiPedia, I found the following except from the first chapter:
What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.
Now, every part of this is deeply disingenuous, deeply stupid, or both, but I want to focus on the middle sentence: “The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power.”, and briefly explain why it is wrong in every important respect.
Today we look at the twenty-first chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This chapter ostensibly discusses “How a Prince Must Act in Order to Gain Reputation”, but it actually has relatively little interesting to say on that subject. It has a great deal to say about wise governance.
Today we look at the twentieth chapter of Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince“. This chapter discusses “Whether Fortresses and Other Things Which Princes Often Contrive Are Useful or Injurious”. Note, however, that that description is “truthful but misleading” – this chapter is truly a grab bag of N.M.’s opinions on various stratagems, of which fortresses are but one among many.
