Niccolo Machiavelli is an Italian Renaissance philosopher and politician of the Florentine Republic, whose famous work The Sovereign ensured him a reputation as an atheist and immoral cynic. In his work, he often resorts to “necessity” in order to justify actions that might otherwise be condemned. At the same time, Machiavelli advises to act prudently in certain circumstances, and although he proposes rules for rulers, he does not seek to establish universal political laws, as is characteristic of modern political science.
Basic concepts
The concept of "state" Machiavelli borrowed from the "Divine Comedy" by Dante Alighieri. There it is used in the meaning of “state”, “situation”, “complex of phenomena”, but not in that abstract sense, which from a semantic point of view sums up the various forms of government. The Florentine thinker still has Dant meaning, but he was the first to make a semantic shift, which made it possible to express political and ethnic forces, natural conditions and the existing territory with subjective forces involved in the exercise of power, a complex of social powers and ways of manifesting them.
In Machiavelli, the state includes people and means, that is, the human and material resources on which any regime is based, and in particular, the system of government and a group of people who are in the service of the sovereign. Using this realistic approach, the author defined the phenomenology underlying the genesis of the “new state”.
Relations with subjects
Machiavelli's “new state” is directly related to his view of the “new sovereign”. The Florentine thinker has in mind the category of politicians who differ in the way they interact with other people or social groups. Therefore, the relationship between the ruler and his subjects are fundamental to understanding the ideas of the Florentine thinker. To understand how the emperor acts for his legitimization, we need to consider how he understands "justice", using the approach described in the dialogue of Socrates with the sophist Frasimach from the "Republic" of Plato.
Justice
The dialogue is dominated by two definitions of this concept. On the one hand, justice is that everyone gets what suits him. It also consists in doing good to friends and evil to enemies. Frasimach understands justice as “the interest of the stronger”, i.e. with power. In his opinion, it is the rulers who are the source of justice, their laws are fair, but they are adopted only in their interests to maintain their power.
The approach of Frasimachus is purely philosophical. On the contrary, Machiavelli analyzes the relationship between the sovereign and his subjects from a practical point of view. He does not try to define the concept of "justice", but is guided by a pragmatic view of "good." For the Florentine thinker, adequate, fair laws are effective laws. And, as a logical consequence of this, the one who publishes them, the sovereign, is exposed to the same system of evaluation. The difference between theory and practice is that the ruler establishes "justice" through the state. This is the difference between Sovereign Niccolo Machiavelli and the "tyrant" of Frasimachus.
The role of the ruler of the Florentine thinker is determined by the relationship between people and social groups. The position of the “tyrant” of Frasimach is different in that in his case there are no such relations. There is only complete subordination of subjects to it.
The Florentine thinker did not write a treatise on tyranny. In the sovereign, he sees a model of someone who is able to save public life. He is a servant of politics.
Relations with the people
Machiavelli develops the theme of the interaction of the ruler with the people. Since people want a lot, but are not able to achieve everything, in politics one must count on the worst, and not on the ideal.
The Machiavelli state is seen as a relationship between subjects and government, based on love and fear. An interesting concept arises from this idea, called the “consensus theory." The sovereign is part of society. But not any, but the ruling one. In order to manage, he must be legitimate and strong. The latter is manifested in the way he imposes his rule and declares himself at the international level. These are necessary conditions if actions arising from the legitimacy of the sovereign must be embodied and applied.
But it is not an abstract element, it is part of politics, and this, according to Machiavelli, is the result of a relationship between the authorities. The definition of power is important because it dictates the rules of the game.
Power concentration
According to the theory of the Machiavelli state, powers in it should be as concentrated as possible in order to avoid their loss as a result of individual and independent actions of people. Moreover, the concentration of power leads to less violence and arbitrariness, which is the basic principle of the rule of law.
In the historical context of central Italy at the beginning of the 16th century. this approach is a clear criticism of the feudal regime and the rule of the city nobility or aristocratic oligarchy. The fact that the parties of the nobility recognized and accepted civil "rights" meant that people participated in political life, but not in the modern sense of the expression, which arose only in 1789 after the revolution in France.
Legitimacy
When Machiavelli analyzes the “civil state”, the principle of legitimacy is traced in the relations established between various forces in the political arena. However, it is important that the author of the treatise considers the legitimacy emanating from the people to be much more important than the legitimacy of the aristocracy, since the latter wants to oppress, and the first not to be oppressed ... The worst that a ruler can expect from a hostile population is to be abandoned.
Military power is the mainstay of the state
The love of the people for the sovereign appears when he rules without oppression and maintains a balance with the aristocracy. To preserve power and impose such a method of government, the ruler is forced to use force. Mostly military.
Machiavelli writes that if Moses, Cyrus, Theseus and Romulus were unarmed, they could not impose their laws for a long time, as happened with Savonarola, who was deprived of authority immediately after the crowd ceased to believe in him.
The example used by the Florentine thinker to explain the need for control over the armed forces of someone in power is obvious, because the author was not going to give only general and abstract advice. Machiavelli believes that each government is able to strike a balance between moderate and tough exercise of powers in accordance with the type of state and government relations with figures operating in the political arena. But in this equation, in which the feeling of love and hate is easily overcome by people, the ruler’s basic rule is not to use force is useless and disproportionate. The severity of measures should be the same for all members of the state, regardless of their social differences. This is a fundamental condition for maintaining legitimacy. Thus, power and violence coexist and become the backbone of government.
The influence and success that the emperor enjoys are not something that he can choose or ignore, because they are an integral part of politics. Citing a classic example from the history of the Peloponnesian war of Thucydides, the author argues that the ruler should not have any other goal or thought and do nothing else but study the war, its rules and order, because this is his only art.
What kinds of states does Machiavelli distinguish?
The Florentine thinker divides them into monarchies and republics. At the same time, the former may be either inherited or new. The new monarchies are entire states or parts thereof, annexed as a result of conquests. Machiavelli divides the new states into those acquired by the will of fate, his own and other people's weapons, as well as valor, and their subjects can be either traditionally free or accustomed to obey.
Seizure of power
The doctrine of the state of Machiavelli is based on an assessment of the forces that a statesman can and should use. They represent, on the one hand, the sum of all collective psychological elements, common beliefs, customs and aspirations of people or social categories, and on the other, knowledge of state issues. To manage, you need to have an idea of the real state of things.
According to Machiavelli, the state is gained either by the favor of the people, or by the nobility. Since these two sides are everywhere, it follows from this that the people do not want the rules to oppress them and know, and the aristocracy wants to rule and oppress. From these two opposite desires, either the state, or self-government, or anarchy arises.
For Machiavelli, the way the ruler comes to power is not important. The help of the “strong” would limit his ability to act, because it would be impossible for him to control and manipulate them or satisfy their desires. "Strong" will ask the sovereign to oppress the people, and the latter, assuming that he came to power thanks to his support, would ask not to do this. The risk of tension in public life stems from poor governance.
From this point of view, Machiavelli contradicts the concept of Francesco Gvichchardini. Both thinkers lived at the same time, both in Florence, but each of them saw political legitimacy in their own way. If Machiavelli wanted the protection of the Florentine republican rights and freedoms to be transferred to the people, Gvichchardini relied on the nobility.
Strength and Consensus
In the works of Machiavelli, in principle, there is no opposition between force and consensus. Why? Because people always act according to their own customs and habits. He is not capable of abstract thinking and therefore can not understand the problems based on complex causal relationships. That is why his point of view is limited to oratory elements. The impact of this cognitive limitation is reflected in political participation. Its impulse is to relate and express itself only in modern and specific situations. As a result, the people understand their representatives, judge the laws, but lack cognitive ability, for example, to evaluate the Constitution.
This restriction does not prevent him from exercising his fundamental political rights through public debate. The people are directly interested in maintaining "legality."
In contrast to Aristotle, Machiavelli does not see in the people raw, indifferent and unconscious material that can take any form of government and endure coercion of the sovereign. In his opinion, he is endowed with a bright, intelligent and responsive form of spirituality, capable of rejecting any abuse emanating from those in power.
When the elite impedes this phenomenon, demagogy arises. In this regard, the threat to a free political life does not come from the people. Machiavelli sees in demagogy the fundamental element preceding tyranny. Thus, the threat comes from the nobility, because it is interested in creating power that acts outside the law.
Virtues of the sovereign
The concept of politics underlies the entire system of the Florentine thinker. Therefore, the Machiavelli state is far from creating an individual force that acts without a doubt.
Individualism is considered by the Florentine thinker as an ambition, a way of spending free time, pride, desire, cowardice, etc. This assessment does not come from an arbitrary aesthetic point of view, but from a legitimate moral perspective.
At the same time, the individualism of the emperor Niccolo Machiavelli is seen as the absence of humanity, infidelity, corruption, wickedness, etc.
Machiavelli frees him from moral values. But he does this because of the public and political role of the sovereign, knowing how important his position is. If the same person used the same methods as an individual, then these exceptions would disappear. For Machiavelli, the relationship between ethics and politics is still influenced by Christian morality. The good maintained by the Church for centuries remains valid, but when a politician enters the scene, it disappears. The ethics used by the emperor are based on other values in which success is the main goal. The sovereign must pursue her even in violation of religious ethics and at the risk of losing the “soul” in order to save the state.
In the book of Machiavelli, the ruler does not need good qualities - he only needs to seem like that. Moreover, according to the Florentine thinker, possessing them and always observing them is harmful. It is better to seem merciful, faithful, humane, religious, righteous and be so, but with the proviso that, if necessary, the sovereign can turn into his opposite. It must be understood that a ruler, especially a new one, cannot possess qualities for which people are respected, because he is often forced to act in defiance of loyalty, friendship, humanity and religion in order to support the state. Therefore, he needs to have a mind ready to turn wherever the winds and variations of fortune force him, without going, if possible, from the righteous path, but without disdaining it.