...there might have been certain events that were left untouched by this movie that could have lend us more valuable information about the Cambodian Genocide and the Khmer Rouge regime, I would leave that point be and focus on relating the movie to the Machiavellian view of politics, power, and society. Back when Cambodia was still in Prince Sihanouk’s control, the country did little to intervene with the matters of the Vietnam civil war by giving favors on both sides. When Lon Nol took over, however, Cambodia suddenly became a part of the Vietnam battlegrounds. He allowed the American troops to bomb away suspected hideouts of South Vietnamese guerillas located in southern Cambodia, resulting bombings that took almost 750,000 lives (http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia.html). While these things were happening, the number of Khmer Rouge’s members was rapidly increasing. Khmer Rouge’s leader, Pol Pot, was a great admirer of the Maoist communism and launched an extreme campaign of reconstructing Cambodia and eradicating the pollution that “Western Society” inflicted on them. In the Machiavellian point of view, he is a very laudable prince for he was able to gain and expand his power to hold the entire state of Cambodia in his hands. He gave us a glimpse on how to effectively activate the virtú of a leader in order to make both his subjects and soldiers obey his every command. All Pol...
Words: 1547 - Pages: 7
...opposing one another. Ultimately, whatever beliefs these schools of thought may hold, and whatever actions these beliefs may lead them and the state their purpose is to shape the state into what they believe is ideal and beneficial for all. Of the many ideologies which are followed by statesmen, varied they may be, the ultimate goal is to create a society according to their ideals. In this study we will be discussing two thinkers whose schools of thought have had a significant impact on political philosophy today. The first is Niccolo Machiavelli. A philosopher, politician, diplomat and historian whose works have made his name a by-word for pragmatism and ruthlessness not just in politics but in everyday life. His most famous work, the Prince, advocated the separation of personal morals to that of one’s political morals, and the emphasis not on ideology but on what would be the most beneficial course of action to take. Though criticized by many for the amorality his beliefs possess, his influence in political thought has affected other prominent philosophers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Adam Smith, David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. The second is Lao Tzu. He was an ancient Chinese philosopher who founded the religion of Taoism, which emphasized living in harmony with the Tao, or...
Words: 3850 - Pages: 16
...Machiavelli’s as a Humanist: Examples and the Lesson He Learn Humanities 101 Strayer University Instructor: Professor Coppelli CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORSHIP: I certify that I am the author of this paper and that any assistance received in its presentation is acknowledged and disclosed in the paper (with both in-text citations and a Works Cited sheet at the end of the essay). I have also cited any sources from which I used data, ideas, or words, quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. I also certify that this paper was prepared specifically for this course and has not been used for another course (and will not be) either in whole or substantial part. TYPE NAME AND DATE HERE: Power is defined as; a person, group, or nation having great influence or control over others; the might of a nation, political organization, or similar group and; forcefulness; effectiveness (Inc., 2011) . A humanist is defined as one who is concerned with the interests and welfare of humans (Inc., 2011). Niccolo’ Machiavelli sought after the power of politics because; he was constantly explaining to individual how to get power and how to hold on to it. He thought,” humanists suppose to believe that individual only grows to maturity, both intellectually and morally through participation in life of the state’ (Machiavelli, 1531, revised 1975, 1981, 1995, 1999). Everyone has their own opinions about him, and his way of life; depending on whom you speak with. His life has some examples...
Words: 1769 - Pages: 8
...Major themes in the Prince Statesmanship & Warcraft Machiavelli believes that good laws follow naturally from a good military. His famous statement that “the presence of sound military forces indicates the presence of sound laws” describes the relationship between developing states and war in The Prince. Machiavelli reverses the conventional understanding of war as a necessary, but not definitive, element of the development of states, and instead asserts that successful war is the very foundation upon which all states are built. Much of The Prince is devoted to describing exactly what it means to conduct a good war: how to effectively fortify a city, how to treat subjects in newly acquired territories, and how to prevent domestic insurrection that would distract from a successful war. But Machiavelli’s description of war encompasses more than just the direct use of military force—it comprises international diplomacy, domestic politics, tactical strategy, geographic mastery, and historical analysis. Within the context of Machiavelli’s Italy—when cities were constantly threatened by neighboring principalities and the area had suffered through power struggles for many years—his method of viewing almost all affairs of state through a military lens was a timely innovation in political thinking. Goodwill & Hatred To remain in power, a prince must avoid the hatred of his people. It is not necessary for him to be loved; in fact, it is often better for him to be feared. Being...
Words: 936 - Pages: 4
...FOUNDATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT THOUGHT TOPIC “What is important about any philosophy is not what is explains, but what it assumes”. Discuss this question critically and provide examples of assumptions which underpin Machiavellian & Platonic philosophies. In this paper I will discuss the assumptions which underpin Machiavellian & Platonic philosophies in reference to The Republic and The Prince. My position is that both Machiavallian and Plantonic philosophies make assumptions in exemplifying their notions. Machiavelli’s is intentional while Plato’s is unintentional. Also both philosophies through their assumptions sometimes contradict each other. Well expressed In discussing his notion above it is important to understand the basic theory and ideas of Machiavelli and Plato. Both Machiavelli and Plato produce arguments for order in the state but they have different notions of how to go about order. Plato obsesses with certainty and has an ideal form of order, while order with Machiavelli is learning to live with uncertainty. Machiavelli believes we need to be able to work with insecurity and not try and produce certainty. He believes we embrace uncertainty by developing our own armour. Knowledge is the basis of leadership for Plato while Power is the basis of leadership for Machievelli. In the Republic the Allegory of the Cave represents Plato's views on philosophy. Basically, we are all in the cave and Philosophy is what brings us out of the cave. Plato believes...
Words: 1025 - Pages: 5
...Niccolò Machiavelli and Martin Luther: Shaping Modern Political Theory By: Andrew Plotnikov Hist 151-001 I pledge that I received no unauthorized assistance in the completion of this work _____________________________________ Martin Luther and Niccolò Macchiavelli were two European figures in the early sixteenth century who recognized crises of leadership and authority in Europe. Machiavelli and Martin Luther were arguably two of the greatest reformist minds of early 1500s, and their reactions to the crises of leadership present in their countries through their writings led to tremendous political and religious advancements; through their analyses of legitimate rule in The Prince (Machiavelli), and On Christian Freedom and Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation (Luther), Machiavelli essentially shaped modern political thought, and Luther sparked the Protestant Reformation that shocked Europe in the early 1500s. Though their responses were based on different groundwork, they each detected and sought to resolve their respective crises, and in doing so aligned their political theories. In analyzing the greatness of the two monumental European figures and their abilities to catalyze change in so many people, comparisons between the writings of both begin to emerge. In particular, Luther and Machiavelli shared innovative perspectives in their analyses on legitimate rule, and in doing so they revealed the pillars on which they built their cases: through...
Words: 1762 - Pages: 8
...Name Instructor Course Date Machiavelli and Mill’s democracy During the 16th century, Europe was governed by a monarchy. This was a king who ruled his territory solely and enjoyed the support from a group of nobles. Niccolo Machiavelli authored the book “The Prince” on the basis of the European feudal system, in which, he taught basic rules surrounding governance for a leader based on his understanding. According to Machiavelli, it is better for a leader (prince) to be feared by his subjects rather than loved. In addition, a leader should strive to clinch on power at all costs since they possess the power to do everything in the interest and benefit of the state (Held, 201). Various democratic principles are evident in the office of the President, congressmen, and the common citizens of the United States. Nevertheless, the constitution bars leaders from exhibiting the characteristics of Machiavelli’s prince via laying down a system of power checks and balances. Numerous concepts put forward by Machiavelli can presently be practiced by the President because he remains as the most senior leader of the nation. Moreover, Machiavelli’s most outstanding aspect of democracy is that a capable leader should do all he can in his capacity to remain in power. Evidently, numerous presidents in many nations share this wish and express their willingness to go to severe measures to retain their offices. Politicians; for instance are willing to spend huge amounts of dollars at each campaign...
Words: 653 - Pages: 3
...One may think that little comparison could be made between Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince and George Orwell’s Animal Farm. However many of the theories of leadership put forward in 1513 in The Prince can be found in Animal Farm. Those same ideas and theories can be applied to educational leaders and educational leadership to examine the morality of Machiavelli’s practices in education. This paper will compare and contrast leadership elements in both The Prince and Animal Farm. Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 1513. The purpose of The Prince was to record the knowledge that Machiavelli held in regards to leadership and power. Machiavelli lays out in details the ways in which a prince can come to power and how to maintain that power. The principles that Machiavelli put forth are straight forward with no sugar coating and often considered immoral. Orwell’s Animal Farm is in stark contrast to The Prince’s fiction. The novel is set on an English farm where the animals have taken over the farm from humans to rule it for themselves. The animals start out believing that the product of their labor will benefit only them and that all animals are to be treated equally. Over time one of the animals comes to power and emanates the human habits that lead to the overthrow of the humans in the first place. The work is satirical of the Communist Revolution and Stalinism. Orwell and Machiavelli present a united front in the portrayal of the non-ruling class. Machiavelli makes no apologies...
Words: 2277 - Pages: 10
...THE AFRICAN PRINCE Justifying African State Leaders’ Decisions Through Machiavellian Realism Safir Jamal Copyright 2008 – All Rights Reserved THE AFRICAN PRINCE Safir Jamal Ambrose Bierce defined politics as “the conduct of public affairs for private advantage” (Jansson 468). When this nineteenth century American journalist expressed such a sardonic view about the art of governance, he alluded to the inseparability of politics and self-interest. This inseparability forms the foundation of classical realism, a prominent international relations theory that attests that human nature is self-serving, sinful and wicked. Such traits ultimately help to explain why all actors endeavour to satisfy their individual intentions (Sens 14). While principles of self-interest are central to the classical realist theory, it is the importance of power that has become widely synonymous with the realist perspective. Defined as the ability to make other actors do what they would not otherwise do, the pursuit of power is an instinctive desire of all individuals (Singer 81). One individual in particular, Niccolo Machiavelli, had arguably the most profound understanding in history of the importance of power (Kuper 1). In his acclaimed treatise The Prince, Machiavelli, a 15th century Florentine diplomat, advised state leaders – or princes – on effective approaches to statecraft. As an extension of classical realism, Machiavellian views have proven to be timeless and universal, as they have...
Words: 2674 - Pages: 11
...Does the End Justify the Means? Should the doctrine of “the end justifies the means” be accepted? The "the end justifies the means" doctrine is acceptable, but only under certain situations. To understand why this position is being taken, you have to understand the origin of "the end justifies the means." The phrase came from Niccolo Machiavelli's book The Prince. Machiavelli's phrase is interpreted by many to mean that the end result of an action was justified by the actions one took to get there, regardless of the methods used (End justifies the means, n.d.). The phrase suggests that it does not matter whether these methods are legal or illegal, moral or immoral, kind or cruel, or truth or lie. The phrase has to be put into context in order to understand how it can be applied in our modern times. The Prince’s original intended audience was rulers (i.e., government), and was meant to advise and instruct them (Nederman, 2009). The Prince was never meant for the common people. Since "the end justifies the means" was originally meant for the government, then its doctrine can only be acceptable when it is used by the government under certain situations, such as to establish peace during a time of war. Should “the end justifies the means” be unconditional? Can it be situational? Over the years, people have abused "the end justifies the means." The phrase has been used to excuse any wrongs made to attain a goal. For example, a banker will reason that it is all right to steal...
Words: 1264 - Pages: 6
...my previous thesis, I made an arguable claim, but I left the claim at somewhat of a dead end. In this final draft, I shed just a little more light on what I tried to get across to the reader. What I am most pleased with in this revision is the addition of significant comparisons between Don Vito and Michael Corleone, as they are two totally different characters with different tactics in leadership. I feel that the comparisons vividly show that Don Vito is an effective Machiavellian leader, who according to Machiavelli, should remain safe and prosperous; Michael, while also an effective leader, uses more aggressive and hasty tactics to take care of his matters. The most difficult task in my revision process was including enough of an analysis towards some claims I have made. Even though I feel this draft is improved, I feel that I still drag out evidence for a bit too long during some sections of the essay. I hope that you find this essay as persuasive as I found it interesting to write. Thanks for reading, Mike Guzman Michael Guzman March 2011 Professor Chalk Final Draft: Paper #2 A Cold King of Hearts The word “love” brings several unique meanings to the mind. To an individual, love is a jovial feeling upon seeing someone who is cared for. To others, love is a...
Words: 2365 - Pages: 10
...However, Machiavelli believes that the rulers who are loved, actually have a greater chance of being betrayed and attacked as “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, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves [one] by a dread of punishment which never fails” (Machiavelli). In order to add basis to his argument, Machiavelli employs the use of logical syllogism, in which he realizes that all people are naturally selfish and will take advantage of anyone’s kindness, prompting him to dissuade benevolent rulers as they will be a massive target. But, in his analysis, Machiavelli unfairly assumes that the lower class is always looking for ways to usurp power, unbeknownst to him, they just want to sustain a basic living, meaning that competition for power under a More type society isn’t actually...
Words: 442 - Pages: 2
...opposition. In modern politics, after a long period of centralized governments, the brief trend of gaining freedom and equality has been deteriorating and the creation of an illusion of freedom has slowly replaced the true freedom of speech and thought. In the times of Machievelli, governments were centralized under the power of a prince. Machiavelli discussed how a prince should act in order to be fully respected and maintain full power. He suggested that a prince should do whatever was necessary to achieve his objectives and never rely only on ideals; additionally, no price was too high to pay for success, and a prince should focus more on being loved than feared if not possible to have both at the same time. On the same thought, “a prince should not worry if he incurs reproach for his cruelty so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal”, in other words, a prince should sometimes be cruel. Moreover, Machiavelli did not believe in individual freedom. Even the prince needed to follow rules to maintain his success and everyone else had to follow the prince’s orders and live with fear. Hobbes had a similar view of Machiavelli’s. He believed that “kings, whose power is greatest, turn their endeavor to the assuring it at home by laws or abroad by wars” This required a need for a centralized government with full powers to the ruler. Small changes to this political thought arose with John Locke; although still believing in a centralized government, Locke did not...
Words: 1687 - Pages: 7
...presented in chronological order), but aims to provide food for thought and debate. Part 1 looks at Machiavelli, Fayol and Taylor – three famous theorists who have all passed into management mythology, but whose views are sometimes misunderstood. MANAGEMENT THEORISTS In a three-part series, Dilys Robinson looks at ten influential theorists and assesses their influence in business today Thinkers for the 21st century? NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, 1469–1527 The end justifies the means achiavelli lived in Florence, where he worked for the Florentine state as a secretary, then a diplomat. His best known work, The Prince,1 is based on his observation of Cesare Borgia – a cunning, cruel and self-seeking man. Machiavelli did not regard Cesare Borgia as an ideal person, but thought that, under him, the Florentines could unite Italy – and this was his long-term goal. In fact, Machiavelli’s tactic did not work, as the Medici (the ruling family of Florence) took exception to what he said, and Cesare Borgia himself also found the work insulting. Machiavelli was essentially a republican, preferring a state controlled by citizens (in his day, citizens made up only a small part of the population)....
Words: 5652 - Pages: 23
...Machiavelli is well known for his book The Prince, in which he describes the various ways a man can achieve and maintain power. The book proved to be extremely controversial, since Machiavelli believed it better for a ruler to be hated than loved. Machiavelli supported his claims by pointing out the fickleness in human nature, believing that a ruler’s subjects would only offer support during the good times and leave a ruler desolate during the bad (Bondanella and Musa). Although his ideas were radical, he supported them well, much like the claim in which it was not necessary for a ruler to be generous; in fact, he looked down upon generosity. If a ruler were to be generous, then he would have to give from his own possessions, but eventually his abundance would dwindle down to nothing and...
Words: 1185 - Pages: 5
