IN some ways, it must be said, Machiavelli’s idea of the perfectly-managed principality never develops beyond the theoretical stage. He is more than prepared to illustrate his ideas with examples from history, but they nonetheless remain idealistic and, perhaps ironically, utopian. Indeed, as he says himself:

How one actually lives is far distant from how one ought to live. Anyone who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner brings about his ruin rather than his preservation. A man who wishes to act entirely in a virtuous way is soon destroyed among so much that is evil in the world.

It is certainly a fact that the darker side of human nature which Machiavelli himself so admires has often led to the opposite of a stable and well-governed principality. Rather like the Communists, therefore, Machiavelli may well be accused of promoting theories and stratagems that are both unworkable and unrealistic.

In terms of what has been said about the princes of the past, Machiavelli suggests that our interpretations can often be highly subjective:

Thus one has the reputation of being liberal, another mean. One is said to be generous, one greedy; one cruel, one kind; one disloyal another faithful; one weak and cowardly, another bold and brave; one friendly, another proud; one pleasure loving, another restrained; one sincere, another not truthful; one hard, another easy; one serious, another foolish; one religious, another unbelieving, and the like.

Unlike Frederick, of course, Machiavelli’s work has a decidedly amoral flavour and he does not operate within the bounds of what is commonly regarded as morality, or prevailing notions of good and evil. He seems to accept that ‘bad behaviour’ exists and that it should be avoided where necessary, but nonetheless believes that the nature of human societies mean that it often becomes necessary for the prince to employ such methods in his struggle to survive and prosper. Any notion of a religiously-inspired guilt, for example, is total anathema:

Moreover, he need not feel uneasy about being criticised for that bad behaviour which is necessary to maintain the state, because if everything is considered carefully, it will be found that something which looks like virtue, if followed would be his ruin; while something else, which looks wrong, may bring him security and wealth.

Identifying what he perceives to be the characteristic immorality of his opponent’s remarks, Frederick is quick to pour scorn on the man that he regards a great corrupter of souls:

Machiavel represents the universe like a hell, and all the men like the damned; it would be said that this policy wanted to cast all mankind into the pit by a singular hatred, and that he took up the task to destroy our virtues, perhaps with the goal of making our souls more similar to his.

Aware that both Machiavelli and himself approach these issues from completely different perspectives, however, Frederick attempts to lessen the validity of the Italian’s comments by undermining their application in a more practical sense:

Machiavel advances that it is not possible to be completely good in this world without perishing: so, much of mankind is both degenerate and corrupt. I myself say that, in order not to perish, it is necessary to be both good and careful. Men are usually neither completely saintly, nor completely predatory; but both the lovers of virtue and the haters of humanity, as well as the regular variety of sinner, will all agree to live under a powerful, just and skilful prince.

Frederick’s point is that people are far more predisposed to waging conflict against a tyrant than a man who is seen to be just. This assertion is rather difficult to justify, because not only are many people apathetic – particularly in our own time – but the kind of man favoured by Machiavelli cares little for the moral constitution of those who are there either to be deposed or brought to heel by a new prince. So whilst Machiavelli can often appear unrealistic, Frederick also has a marked tendency to assume that political leaders can find it in their hearts to apply justice or, in turn, that others will then react towards them in the same manner:

There is no gain to be had by being malicious with misanthropes, but there is by being virtuous and intrepid with them; you will make your people virtuous like you, neighbours will want to imitate you, and the humanity-haters will scramble from the light.

TO BE CONTINUED…