This guy's logic is fucking absurd
How?
You're fucking retarded
>>7732379
>logic
>>7732412
annnnnnnd?
>>7732379
don't start threads if you're retarded
learn to lurk
>>7732412
What a second wave tumblrista thing to say.
>>7732412
If you're retarded enough to not apply his principles to modern day society, then you're too dumb to read his book anyways.
>>7732430
If ideas cannot be timeless, they are for the less.
Machiavellian political theory is basically an ends justify the means thought process, which is hardly defensible. Theres a reason he is studied from a historical perspective and not taken seriously from a philosophical one.
>>7732435
>insinuating that might isn't right
>>7732445
This nigga literally says it's okay for princes to lie to their people and not keep their promises. He basically tells the prince to only serve his own interests and not those of his people.
>>7732449
Pretty much yeah
The monarch lives for himself, and the people are his subjects
>>7732449
>>7732435
Nigga are you 14 years old or something. That's exactly how the world works and how it will always work insofar as people with power also have the ability to control people's perception of things to a degree.
Moreover, power makes society work. It gives us stability. A bit of abuse is just a cost associated and should be managed by society's other institutions accordingly.
Get the fuck over it, you child.
>>7732379
>2016
>not knowing the prince is satirical
Nigga what?
>>7732454
no dumbshit, he is saying it is ok to lie in order to get shit done rather than to tell the truth and cause further damage.
he was always for the people. He criticized actions that seemed helpful to an incapable ruler but were actually bad for society. He was arguing against all the other philosophers that postulated that you needed to be a good person to be a good ruler. Machiavelli says that you can be a shitty person as long as you do what needs to be done. This still applies to today as well.
the pubic is stupid, and if a head of state always told the truth, then he would never get anything done.
>>7732469
I fail to see how a work on creating a striving monarchy has any relevance in modern society.
>"it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because fortune is a woman; and it is necessary, if one wants to hold her down, to beat her and strike her down."
What the actual fuck
>>7732449
>implying it's different these days
Ever heard a politician speak?
>>7732470
look outside of the united states moron. For christ sake Syria is up for grabs right now. Anyway why would it matter if its applicable to modern day?
>>7732496
What is its purpose if it's not? As a historical look at how politics used to work?
>>7732470
>but guys
>2016
>lmao
>>7732511
They who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.
>>7732461
>look mom I posted it again!
>>7732461
i don't know anyone who reads it who seriously thinks this
to be a successful autocrat, one must be crafty
where's the satire in this?
>>7732461
>being wrong
>>7732449
>>>fucking implying
Congratulations on completely missing the point of Machiavelli. This is what happens when you (a) have no knowledge of earlier history, and (b) immediately read meme books like The Prince instead of texts which, although rarely read, are almost universally considered superior, like The Discourses on Livy.
If you weren't retarded you would realize that Machiavelli condemns self-serving rulers and espouses republican values, but nevertheless presents a hands-off (vaguely "amoral," with Christian "morality" largely displaced by or at least in conflict with non-religious virtù) handbook for ruling. The problem with reading The Prince and only reading The Prince is that it's like 90 fucking pages, so you see none of his pretty crucially qualifying statements along the lines of "Yeah a ruler would be a total dick if he did this and you're evil if you do BUT here's how to do it if you really wanted to."
>>7732465
Excellent post. Major tenets of Machiavelli involve manipulating or at least deceiving the public; he praises the use of religion as an institution to subdue the masses in light of the mathematical impossibility of educating the masses to an elite level.
OP, if you want to actually try to understand Machiavelli instead of being a total mongoloid, read Plato ("Statesman"), read Livy books 1-10, read Polybius, read Machiavelli's Discourses, and THEN read the Prince.
Fucking casuals.
>>7732593
I'm just reading it as part of my Shakespeare class, had I gone out of my way to read it, I would have tackled the prior material.
>>7732600
no offense, but you're way out of your depth. The man was a genius, and his lessons will carry over into any society in which humans are the dominant social group.
>>7732600
Okay, that makes sense, but as >>7732609 said you're not really ready for it. Definitely revisit Machiavelli once you've had some time to build up to him. (G R E E K S etc.)
With that said you're probably not expected to understand that for a Shakespeare class. What are you guys supposed to be gleaning from reading him, in the context of this class?
>>7732379
This is one of those books that you tell people youve read to prove a point in a worthless argument. Nothing more.
>>7732661
Maybe if you're in high school, ya.
>>7732379
This is one of those books you tell people you've read to prove to them you're autistic. Nothing more.
>>7732465
>>7732593
These anons are correct.
>>7732379
>This guy's logic is fucking absurd
>I-I'm just reading it for skool
Seriously you need to fuck off & SWTG. Learn that you know nothing. NOTHING. How can you even presume to form an opinion on any significant work? This is the result of fucking modern man children. Nobody's ever told you shut up & listen. Your sense of entitlement is tangible across the ether. This isn't show & tell. Nobody cares what you think about 'this guy's logic'. If you don't understand, your instinct should be to doubt yourself to your very core. You should reexamine all your preconceptions & adopted opinions. You are privileged to live at a time & place where you can come into contact with such works. For a brief, fleeting moment, you had the opportunity to raise yourself up, to commune with something higher than your self. & you fucked up. You fucked up big time.
>>7732379
Whether you read it as a manual for the most enlightened despotism possible where the governed, for the time being, are ignorant and superstitious, or as a grand expose of sinister technique, one comes away with the impression that he is more motivated to inform than to deceive the reader. That is to say that in holding up a mirror to real (as opposed to ideal) politics it's breathtakingly honest compared to almost all political writing. Most politicians are in any case alpha apes rather than alpha humans, which are winningly endowed with a sense of humor their less evolved students lack in such abundance. (Compare the majestic Falstaff to his bitch protege Prince Hal IV)
>>7732983
>Compare the majestic Falstaff to his bitch protege Prince Hal IV
Intriguing; please elaborate.
>>7732476
like, so triggered
also congrats to all of you for partaking in the worst thread right now on /lit/
>>7732999
>pretty
Not that anon but refer to the pep rally Hal gives to a group of warriors charging a gate:
https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/henry-v-act-iii-scene-i-once-more-unto-breach-dear-friends
Hal is manipulating the poor men in his ranks by appealing to their English blood. Compare that to Falstaff:
http://shakespeare.mit.edu/1henryiv/1henryiv.5.1.html
(the speech is at the bottom)
Anyways it is clear who the Alpha Male is here and who is the ape.
>>7732412
But that's exactly the opposite. In a society like ours where no one gives a fuck and is highly competitive his ideas fit prefectly.
>>7732435
>ends justify the means thought process, which is hardly defensible.
>>7732449
Now that I think about it Stirner basically copied his theories.
>>7732476
This is one of the most famous quotes.
What's wrong with it?
>>7733139
Do you think amorality was invented the renaissance, lad?
>>7732476
Triggered? Nietzsche was saying nastier things about women into the late 19th century.
Anyways, it really annoys me that Machiavelli is taught through the prince in American schools. And it's not even the good parts of the prince, it's the parts concerning amorality, I only encountered them in an ethics class.
Machiavelli's analysis of faction is core to the federalist papers, only Locke and Hobbes were more influential in framing the constitution. Cicero was also really important in the structure of government, if not the rights enumerated.
>>7732972
Jesus Christ, take it easy.
>>7732652
Comparing Richard III to Machiavelian philosophy
>>7732449
>This nigga literally says it's okay for princes to lie to their people and not keep their promises. He basically tells the prince to only serve his own interests and not those of his people.
Here is an exampel you can agree with:
There is a hypothetical nation in Europe where one party has such a large majority of members in goverment that they can force through whatever they want.
This nation exists in the present situation and are being flooded with migrants from the Middle East and North Africa. The native population is pissed and wants the migration to stop. They enegage in protests etc.
Sensing that they will lose seats in the next election to rival parties, the hypothetical party has a strategy. They will lie to their people and give migrants voting rights. They tell the natives that they will stop the migration and deport several migrants, inorder to clam the people. They start heavily censorring the press and secretly give the migrants voting rights, hoping they will vote for them in the next election put of thankfullness. The party also adds further insentives, promising them various forms of handouts etc. This information is only passed out to the migrants when then arrive, the natives are held in the dark.
Is this an accetable use of Machivellian power?
>>7732412
>>7732379
>Barely any of these ideas hold up in modern society
Are you retarded? Machiavelli is based and he objectively rekt political moralists.
>>7732449
People are inheritly selfish and therefore don't always know what's best for them. A virtuous leader meanwhile has to consider the state of their nation on a daily basis in order to maintain power. Ergo, an intelligent leader knows better than an ignorant member of the public.
Also, Machiavelli was fond of Republicanism, so it's not like he didn't have the people's best interests at heart.
>>7733797
Jesus Christ was a faggot and his logic is fucking absurd.
>>7732412
I'm sorry you're retarded
>"The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws."
this logic is, indeed, fucking absurd tbqh
>>7735045
It's a pretty stupid one because at the point where you're lying about who gets voting rights and censoring the press heavily you may as well just fabricate the votes.
Threadly reminder you're all fucking idiots who can't even understand the basic fact this is all shit on purpose to undermine the particular for whom this was written for. Look it up, you goddamn retards.
>>7735374
ye to be quite barbeque qonest it makes like 0 sense tbqh(totally bitching quite honorable)
>>7735438
>this is all shit on purpose to undermine the particular for whom this was written for. Look it up, you goddamn retards.
>this is all shit on purpose
>Look it up, you goddamn retards.
I'd rather look up you're reddit karma, grill friend
>>7735447
whatever you want, virgin. Have fun using what's in that book to rule the world ;)
>>7735467
>;)
dude lmao it was all a satire guise xD
>>7732379
>Not realising that it's satire.
Go back to business school, OP.
>>7732527
you're supposed to laugh at it, in like, self-defense, or something.
>>7735374
>no good laws without good arms.
>"But this is absurd."
Well, yeah, you quote one sentence out of context and of course it looks absurd. His point is that if you're so moral that you are unwilling to use force to keep the peace, then people will suffer and you will lose your rule.
Anyway, if Machiavelli's statement is not "logical" (and I agree with you, it isn't), then so much the worse for logic.
>>7735374
Enjoy enforcing your good laws by asking nicely, faggot.
