Final: Machiavelli's The Prince

This book is in some way a "how to book" on how to be a successful leader of pretty much anything. Machiavelli has clearly stated each idea and gives examples from history to prove his points; even though the thought can drag out and I found myself skim over some things the second time reading.

"There are three kinds of intelligence: One kind can understand on its own, the second can understand through others, and the third can understand neither on its own nor through others. The first kind is exellent, the second good enough, the third useless. Hence, if Pandolfo was not in the first category, he was at least in the second, because even if a prince does not possess great intelligence, if he can judge the good or bad that a man says or does, then he can distinguished between his adviser's good and bad deeds, and praise the good and punish the bad. The adviser cannont hope to decive him, and so behaves well" (Machiavelli 108-109).

I found Peter Constantine's translation to be easy to read and has helpful footnotes to history that Machiavelli is alluding to and also to better explain ideas that maybe unclear. The chapters are also clearly stated on what Machiavelli is going to talk about. As far as the book reads, I couldn't help but imagine being in a college classroom listening to a lecture.

It is hard in this modern world to relate what Machiavelli says to our government. I have; however, realized that this book could greatly apply to the communist countries that have one leader. Other than that, one could relate this book to everyday things like, teachers "ruling their class", corprate businesses, cults, etc. This is definitly my second favorite book, after Master Sun Tzu's "The Art of War."

Of How to Avoid Contempt and Hatred

"I therefore conclude that a prince need not worry unduly about conspiracies when the people are well disposed toward him. But if they are his enemies and hate him, he must fear everything and everybody" (Machiavelli 88).

I find this to be an example in our government. A lot of people "hated" George W. Bush, but people in power must have respected the decision of those party leaders who put him in power. No one conspired against him, or if they did they didn't get very far into doing it.

It is important, and Machiavelli stresses the point, that one in power must not have enemies that can and will do something to bring them out of power whether it's a government, business owners, etc.

"Well-ordered states and wise princes have been careful not to anger the nobles and to keep the populace content, because this is one of the most important tasks that falls on a prince" (Machiavelli 88).

This passage is important to life in general. Don't make enemies with the wrong people, and one should keep those around him happy and give them no reason to plot against him. This is important to everybody, not just leaders, or people who are in power. It would make one's life much easier if he did not have enemies with people who might seriously do him wrong.

1). While comparing "The Art of War" and "The Prince," there are contradicting ideas. Sun Tzu says that one is to anger his opponent to have them careless in battle/conflict. Considering a prince is in a time of war, how would he know whether to use Sun Tzu's ideas or Machiavelli's ideas?