5 ms·
We often forget The Prince was a job application, from an exiled and impoverished Machiavelli to the court of Medici. Parks seems to forget this inconvenient fa
by rrggrr 10y ago
We often forget The Prince was a job application, from an exiled and impoverished Machiavelli to the court of Medici. Parks seems to forget this inconvenient fact. Parks also forgets to mention that it was Machiavelli's Discourses on Livy, a book that disagrees with The Prince with numerological precision, that screams Machiavelli's love of a Republic over a monarchical or despotic rule, and that defines virtue in idealized, classical terms most embrace today.
As Parks implicitly states, the difference between a man's message and his mission depends a great deal on who is reporting it. It is this difference, between The Prince and The Discourses, between marketing and motive, where Park may learn Trump, like Machiavelli, is no fan of Princes but is instead very much a man of the Signora and the Guild to the great benefit of a Republic. Park's piece is straight from the Medici playbook.
- jldugger 10y ago> We often forget The Prince was a job application, from an exiled and impoverished Machiavelli to the court of Medici. To some degree it is a mirror, but rather than an application I think it was more of a middle finger. It's a fairly clearly satirical work, that calls the Medici court hypocrites, brutes, and the little advice it offers includes arming the populace.
- jacobolus 10y agoIt’s often veiled/subtle about its explicit vs. implicit messages, with layers of indirection and lots of wry humor, though the surface meaning of the text is straightforward. Which is why it’s great for the careers of modern political philosophers who can spend years combing through it for clues. Oh hey, linked at the bottom of the OP: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1971/11/04/a-special-supplement-the-question-of-machiavelli/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1971/11/04/a-special-supplem...
- B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago> to the great benefit of a Republic The favorite form of government of the savvy aristocrat. Sometimes the damn monarchs and tyrants get too cozy with the unwashed masses.
- batarjal 10y agoI'm currently listening to the Great Courses course called "Machiavelli in Context" on Audible, and his take was more that Machiavelli viewed monarchical rule as a stepping stone to a republic. In the Discourses on Livy, he gives the example of the people of the Roman Kingdom rising up to dethrone itheir king to establish the Roman Republic. He goes on to say that, depending on the circumstances, a republic could backslide into monarchical or despotic rule, as the Roman Republic did when it transitioned into the Roman Empire. The idea of a monarchy or a dictatorship being a stepping stone to a republic isn't something I see expressed online as much.