Summary Of Machiavelli's The Qualities Of The Prince

It has become apparent today that a significant majority of people whom reside among the many modern democracies here on the western hemisphere of world are rather very ignorant in the difficulties of nation building and the effort consuming process of developing effective governance in turbulent and chaotic circumstances. We often find that that significant majority that reside among us to be blinded by their first-world conditions, arrogantly pass judgement, carrying views and perceptions of contempt when given a window into the plight of those residing in developing nations, whether through the narrow-minded narratives peddled by various mainstream voices of pseudo-intellectuals or though the means of atrocious click-bait headlines in an
This would be introduced in the format of a step by step guide in Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of the Prince”. Machiavelli would clarify his main principles and ideals by utilizing references of previous significant historical events to better establish his claims and continue to further solidify the basis of these claims with logic and reason. In one claim I found to be critical for his argument, involved the importance of having military prowess in a leader. Machiavelli stresses that a prince must be well versed and familiarized more in military matters as it can decisively be a preventative measure in the case of losing their position of power to any possible threats. He states, “And it is of such importance that knowing warfare not only maintain those who were born princes, but on many occasions allows men of private stations to seize those positions” (86). Machiavelli would then continue to imply that rulers who neglect this concept and focus more on their luxuries, will lose their power swiftly. He explicitly states “It is evident that when princes give more thought to personal luxuries than to arms, they have lost their state. And the first way to lose it is to neglect this art” (86). Judging from my
This point would be regarding the importance of the strong economic basis of the state. In this section, he begins with criticizing those leaders who more or less tend to squander off their resources and wealth through unnecessary lavish displays of grandeur in an effort to shape the public’s perception of those leaders as generous personalities, but at the same time as a consequence of their philanthropist façade, they would drain their own wealth as well as the wealth of the state, then in a more damaging turn, burden those very subjects that they had tried to win over with excessive taxes to generate funds, but at the cost of making themselves despised and held in contempt the very masses that they had initially sought to impress, failing miserably at achieving their aims. In that portion he explicitly states, “There is nothing that uses itself up faster than generosity, for as you employ it you lose the means of employing it, and you become either poor or despised or, to escape poverty, rapacious and hated” (91). In my take of this view, I find myself to be in total consensus with Machiavelli’s opinion on this matter, as I have myself witnessed the plight of those who would spend on a deficit, impoverishing themselves as a result.