Discussion Question for Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince Essay

Discussion Question for Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince - Essay Example He himself was made subject to this, when he lost his position in 1512 in the hands of the Medici Family. All these real life experiences led Machiavelli to write â€Å"The Prince† which at first was criticized for being cruel, but later, it was appreciated for all the theories and guidelines of warfare and politics. He easily finished the old norms of ruling the people and brought about a completely new way to run an empire, city or state. In the beginning of the book, Machiavelli very cleverly identifies his readers with the terms and policies that he will be using further in the book. The initial chapters are simple and they give the reader an easy introduction into the world of Machiavelli: one that exists on the hard work and effort of the ruler himself and has nothing to do with Divine Interference or whatsoever. Niccolo’s ideas become very clear initially when he clearly explains the idea of maintaining a new principality is better than governing a hereditary sta te. He argues that inheriting power and position means that one has to keep up with people’s expectations to make their life better. However, it is much easier to govern an entirely new principality where people care less if their lives are not fidgeted with. His brutal and cruel nature is depicted through the idea of killing the former Prince’s family to keep control. ... And if his successors had been united they would have enjoyed it securely and at their ease, for there were no tumults raised in the kingdom except those they provoked themselves.† Cold hearted and cold blooded, Niccolo believed that the power stays with you only if you are ready to go to any extents possible. As the book proceeds, the typical Machiavellian thoughts shine. As the adjective suggests, his name is used as a synonym for treachery, cruelty and oppression. Hence, the book starts on with why and how a prince should really act and rule. To put it in simple words, the people of the state do not matter to Niccolo at all. For him it only matters that the Prince, the ruler has faith in him and then there is nothing else that will keep him out of power. â€Å"But to come to those who, by their own ability and not through fortune, have risen to be princes, I say that Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, Theseus, and such like are the most excellent examples†. Contradictory to Ancie nt theory, that rulers were sent with Divine help and that they have to be obeyed at any cost, Niccolo was with the view, that a person, himself is responsible for his throne and no one else, even not the people. Though he does not put aside the idea of a common man’s support, it is just an element or a step to the throne rather than the route itself. He is very clear about his ideology that rulers rule because they believe in their strength and they work hard for it. And working hard, for him meant oppression, brutality and cruelty. Machiavelli moves on to present an argument that ignores the question of right and wrong. He acknowledges the use of crime and cruelty in establishing power, and stresses on extreme cruelty if need rises. However, he suggests limiting the time period of cruelty so