there was literally nothing wrong about this book
satire or not, nothing in it sounds super crazy or ridiculous. i could see someone ruling fairly effectively using this guide.
i'm not sure why "Machiavellian" is being used to describe dictators like Mao or Kim Jong Un or Stalin when the book would condemn their actions as being foolish or rash.
>>7775424
>satire or not
1. Read the "Discourses"
2. Kill yourself
It's not satire m8y.
That being said, Machiavellian is usually a term used to decribe someone that appears to be withholding truth from someone (the public) and/or subtly manipulating them behind the scenes. Fits the bill for most dictators and sociopaths.
>>7775424
I've made the satire argument before, that The Prince was a tool to get its namesake to do stupid shit that would obviously erode one's power in order to facilitate a regime change that would get Machiavelli's job back.
No one's put much stock in it.
>>7775498
1. read 'Green Eggs & Ham'
2. Kill yourself
>>7775424
>nothing in it sounds super crazy or ridiculous
That's because we live in Machiavellian times, where we've come to accept it as a ration means of getting what you need. Back then it was too shocking to even be studied.
It'd be like a politician today writing a 200-300 page manual detailing why Pedophilia should not only be legal, but endorsed. Sure it may have merit and probably argue fantastic points, but it's just too shocking and raw to stomach.
>>7775552
>too shocking and raw to stomach.
Like electrified steak
>>7775538
But I don't want to read Green Eggs & Ham!
>>7775555
Just like an electrified steak
He advocates lying. Secularists don't see lying as wrong unless someone does it to them, but back then lying was considered extremely immoral, period.
>>7775561
You will read Green Eggs and Ham, Sam I Am
>>7775570
But reading Green Eggs and Ham rhymes and doesn't scan.
>>7775555
quads of truth
>>7775555
The Prince could be argued as the political and moral version of electrified steak yes.
>>7775567
>>7775552
>>7775515
>>7775528
ffs though how can you compare what he's saying to pedophilia? This isn't johnathan swift where he's saying niggas should go out and eat fuckin babies.
He's just saying basic things that make sense in the context of ruling a nation.
Don't give away too much of your money to the poor, don't stay too neutral on issues, make sure your enemies don't get the upper hand on you, and don't give people a reason to try to act revenge upon you.
This is really basic straightforward stuff that isn't extremist in the slightest. What I want to know is how did Machiavellian become synonymous with Evil?
Don't bother to read all of >>7775614 it's just stupid.
>>7775614
I'm not comparing Machiavelli's beliefs to pedophilia, I'm saying his beliefs in his time created the similar kind of shock and disgust you see raised around the topic of pedophilia. The extremes of morality. You just couldn't say what he said in those days and not expect outrage
>>7775614
Doing things like breaking your promise whenever it would benefit you is just "common sense" today, but you have to remember that blatantly endorsing this in Machiavelli's time would be considered quite evil.
>>7775693
Machiavelli is considered a specific kind of evil, and while there are far more extreme examples of that kind of evil, his example is the oldest and most famous. Plus his name sounds cooler than most of the other guys.
>prince
the only dude i know who read this book was barely literate and had only two more books in his house, one being "the rational male"
>>7775693
The ruling class is very frequently seen as ominous and evil, which is reflected in the proliferation of conspiracy fiction. Just because evil has become "common sense", doesn't mean it ceased to be evil.
>>7775705
Telling someone to go to reddit because they like a book is one thing, but telling them to go to reddit simply for reading it is retarded.
>>7775698
This, also most people know about Machiavelli from hearsay/references, and haven't actually read him.
>>7775555
That's the first step in my recipe for green eggs and ham
>>7775705
Yes, only barely literate redditors bother with one of the most famous and controversial works on political theory.
You absolute fucking moron.
>>7775552
>>7775567
>That's because we live in Machiavellian times, where we've come to accept it as a ration means of getting what you need. Back then it was too shocking to even be studied.
>but back then lying was considered extremely immoral, period.
This is absurd and blatantly false. People forged documents, tricked and betrayed allies, and committed massacres all the time in that era, in Italy more than anywhere. Ever heard of the 'Guelphs and Ghibellines'?
Hell, there was a point around when Machiavelli lived when a POPE tricked a local lord into coming to Rome on false pretenses and then beheaded him when he got there.
GOAT tier author in Political Science and Political Philosophy/Theory.
>>7779209
You missed thr point.
>>7775552
>Pedophilia should not only be legal, but endorsed. Sure it may have merit and probably argue fantastic points
That was a pretty weak comparison there, man.
>>7775424
It's because Machiavelli is one of those historical figures who gets misrepresented, like Columbus or the Founding Fathers, because he fought the ruling ideas of his day, ideas still in use by oligarchs and tyrants today. If you consider the historical context around him while he was trying to establish the Republic of Florance, not only does his viewpoint appear justified, but it's difficult to think of any other strategies which suited the Republic's needs.
>>7779209
Are you saying people didn't react to these things?
>>7782057
Please share a better one if you can, I actually don't like using pedophilia as the comparison to things that are shocking and disturbing in society because's an unfair comparison that can conjure forth the wrong ideas.
>Describes realpolitik
>Gets blammed for realpolitik
