Part One
Remirro da Orca would do well in the modern world as a manager of a sweatshop. Although he is “a swift and cruel man,” (Machiavelli, VII), Remirro da Orca “restored peace and unity with greatest success,” (Machiavelli, VII). He had the ability to control large amounts of people through his cruelty, but was not so unjust that there would be a revolt against him. He could keep people in line and doing their job well though intimidation. The manager of a sweatshop can lord over the people he is in charge of because they have nowhere else to go, just like the people in Romagna.
Oliverotto da Fermo would best succeed as a tabloid reporter. He was raised by his uncle, Giovanni Fogliani, after he was orphaned, and trained and fought under his two uncles. He trusted them, and they in return trusted him. When he was older, he decided that he wanted to take his uncles’ land, so he invited himself to visit and was greeted with great hospitality. There was a great banquet to be held for Oliverotto, but Machiavelli says that “no sooner were they seated than soldiers issued from secret places and slaughtered Giovanni and the rest,” (Machiavelli, VIII). Oliverotto slaughtered the members of his family that had shown him kindness in order to gain power, and he had no conscience about it. Oliverotto would be good in tabloids because he has no shame and no sense of boundaries; both important qualities for someone who makes their living making up lies to accompany embarrassing or fake pictures.
Cesare Borgia would work well in the mafia. He came to power because of his family (specifically, his father becoming the Pope) and paid close attention to his roots. Cesare Borgia kept his family and where he came from in mind, which would help him fit into the mafia mindset very well. He put his family above all else, and had no problems killing off people like Oliverotto da Fermo who took advantage of their family and sacrificed them to get ahead.
Part Two
Machiavelli says that prince’s greatest ally is the common people. “A prince can never secure himself against a hostile people, because of their being too many, whilst from the nobles he can secure himself, as they are few in number,” (Machiavelli, IX).
He who obtains sovereignty by the assistance of the nobles maintains himself with more difficulty than he who comes to it by the aid of the people, because the former finds himself with many around him who consider themselves his equals, and because of this he can neither rule nor manage them to his liking. But he who reaches sovereignty by popular favour finds himself alone, and has none around him, or few, who are not prepared to obey him. (Machiavelli, IX)
The common people will be loyal to the prince, and if the people are loyal to him, the prince will stay in power. “Because men, when they receive goods from him of whom they were expecting evil, are bound more closely to their benefactor; thus the people quickly become more devoted to him,” (Machiavelli, IX). The nobles are few in number, so they could be disposed of if their allegiance wavered, but the people are what decide the power of the prince.
Part 3
The line between being endearingly generous and too generous is thin, and a prince must walk this line very carefully. While a generous ruler is admired, he can also be taken advantage of, and be seen as weak. If he is generous, he will soon use u what he has by giving it away, and the common people would have to pay for it with a raise in taxes. “So that a prince thus inclined will consume in such acts all his property, and will be compelled in the end, if he wish to maintain the name of liberal, to unduly weigh down his people, and tax them, and do everything he can to get money,” (Machiavelli, XVI).
A prince shouldn’t try to please the people by being generous because they will eventually think that he is generous, no matter what he does. “if he is wise he ought not to fear the reputation of being mean, for in time he will come to be more considered than if liberal,” (Machiavelli, XVI). The appearance of being generous while rising to power is good for leaders, as proven by Pope Julius II. “Pope Julius the Second was assisted in reaching the papacy by a reputation for liberality, yet he did not strive afterwards to keep it up,” (Machiavelli, XVI). If the first impression of a prince is that he is generous, the people will continue to think of him in that way. Generosity, to Machiavelli, is not a way to live, but a political strategy.
Part Four
Machiavelli’s views on how to rule go against the Church’s teachings, especially the Beatitudes. “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy,” (Beatitude 7). Machiavelli thinks that mercy is a form of weakness, and should only be used when there is something to gain from it. He justifies it by saying, “He will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies,” (Machiavelli, XVII). Machiavelli is trying to say that having mercy is a bad thing, but what he doesn’t realize is that a prince who doesn’t show mercy to his subjects will not be shown mercy.
“Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” (Beatitude 10). Machiavelli was not interested in the kingdom of heaven; he was interested in living in the moment. He wrote The Prince to teach people how to gain power and keep it, and was not interested in trying to make them better people. Machiavelli teaches to preserve yourself and your power at all costs, not to do the right thing in order for the reward of heaven. “Nevertheless our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account,” (Machiavelli, XVIII). Those who were persecuted because of righteousness may or may not be in the kingdom of heaven, but they are more likely to be remembered for good than a selfish prince who wanted only to further his political career.
Part Five
While the Beatitudes are a noble way to try and live life, the success of the advice in the prince disproves how effective they are. “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth,” (#5). The meek of Machiavelli’s time would be the people without authority: the common people. The common people, if the Beatitude was right, should have controlled their land and county. Instead, a prince who is taught, “The soldiers loved the warlike prince who was bold, cruel, and rapacious,” (Machiavelli, XIX) will control the land and the country of the meek. Machiavelli taught that boldness was the way to win, and was right.
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God,” (Beatitude 9). The phrase “peacemaker” is not in The Prince, which is not surprising. Machiavelli had no interest in peace, unless there was an ulterior motive. “A prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline,” (Machiavelli, XIV). The peacemakers who chose not to fight would not gain land, and would lose their own. While lives would be saved, land and power would be lost, therefore ruining a principality. Machiavelli was not interested in becoming a better person or making princes into moral role models. Instead, he taught princes how to succeed in the ludicrous game of staying on top. The Beatitudes were a good way for priests and other religious people to live, but to get ahead; they simply could not provide the same amount of pure strategy that The Prince covered.
Machiavelli , N. (1513). The prince. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
"The Beatitudes." New International Version of the Bible. Matthew 5:3-12.
