UNIT and Morality 7 MACHIAVALLI: POLITICS AND MORALITY Flashcards
7.1 Introduction: Life and Times of Machiavelli
7.1.1 The Renaissance and Machiavelli
7.1.2 The Life of Machiavelli
7.1.3 His Times
- How time and context influenced Machiavelli’s thinking and philosophy?
Efficient Pointer Summary
Renaissance Context: Social, cultural, economic, and political transformation in 14th-century Italy.
Renaissance Ideals: Shift from medieval Christian values to secularism, humanism, individual liberty, and reason.
Machiavelli’s Role: Product of the Renaissance, influenced by Florence, and focused on state security, unity, and republicanism.
Life of Machiavelli: Born in Florence (1469), educated in Latin and humanism, became diplomat, then chancellor.
Major Works: The Prince, The Discourses, The Art of War, History of Florence, Mandragola.
Machiavelli’s Times: Italy fragmented into city-states; Florence faced corruption and external threats. Europe moved toward nationalism and strong monarchies.
Political Situation: Florence struggled with internal conflict (Medici regime) and external threats (France, Spain).
Machiavelli’s Vision: Advocated for the unification of Italy to face external challenges and achieve strength.
Mnemonic:
Renaissance Ideals Make Machiavelli’s Legacy,
Secular Christianity, Humanism, Individualism,
Major Works, Political Struggles.
Main Answer
Introduction
Machiavelli’s ideas are best understood within the context of the Renaissance, a transformative period in Italy’s history during the 14th and 15th centuries. The Renaissance was marked by a shift away from medieval Christian values toward secularism and humanism, emphasizing individual liberty, reason, and scientific inquiry. This new worldview significantly influenced Machiavelli, whose thoughts on statecraft and political power reflect the intellectual and political changes of his time.
Body
Renaissance Context
The 14th-century Renaissance brought significant changes to Italy’s social, cultural, and political landscape.
It was a period of intellectual and spiritual awakening, influenced by new scientific and philosophical approaches.
Humanism emphasized individual liberty and the pursuit of knowledge based on reason, rather than on religious dogmas.
The Renaissance marked a departure from medieval Christian values, including asceticism, humility, and the focus on the afterlife.
This shift centered on the present world, rejecting ecclesiastical supremacy and embracing secular ideas that promoted the glory of the individual.
Renaissance Ideals
Renaissance thinkers and artists began advocating for a return to pre-Christian ideals, focusing on human nature and rationality.
The concept of humanism during this period emphasized human potential, creativity, and individual achievements.
The Renaissance was non-Salvationist; the focus was on life in the present, not on eternal salvation.
Intellectual emancipation and a rejection of religious constraints encouraged a new sense of freedom and human dignity.
These ideas resonated deeply with Machiavelli, particularly in his views on the state and the role of individuals within it.
Machiavelli’s Role in the Renaissance
Machiavelli was deeply influenced by the Renaissance atmosphere, particularly the intellectual and political currents of his native Florence.
Florence was at the heart of Renaissance thought, and Machiavelli was shaped by its dynamic environment.
As a political thinker, Machiavelli grasped the emerging nature of the modern secular state, where the individual’s emotions and faculties could not be suppressed.
His works, particularly The Prince and The Discourses, reflect his concerns with state security, unity, liberty, and republicanism.
Machiavelli’s focus on practical statecraft and realpolitik was a reflection of the new Renaissance worldview that valued pragmatic, secular governance over idealistic or religious models.
Machiavelli’s Life and Career
Born in Florence in 1469, Machiavelli came from a noble family with ties to the humanist intellectual circles of the time.
He studied Latin and humanistic texts that emphasized moral values such as subordinating personal interests for the common good.
In 1498, he entered public life as a diplomat, and later served as the second chancellor of the Republic of Florence.
Machiavelli traveled widely for his diplomatic work, including visits to France, the Papal Court, and with Cesare Borgia, whom he admired for his ruthless leadership.
After the Medici family regained control of Florence in 1512, Machiavelli was dismissed, imprisoned, and tortured on charges of conspiracy.
He later dedicated The Prince to Lorenzo II de’ Medici in hopes of restoring his political influence.
Machiavelli’s Major Works
Among Machiavelli’s most influential works are The Prince (1513), which explores the nature of political power and leadership.
The Discourses (1516) examines the principles of republicanism and the dynamics of popular governance.
The Art of War (1521) discusses military strategy and the importance of a well-organized army.
History of Florence (1525) offers a detailed chronicle of the city-state’s political history.
Mandragola, a play, delves into the relationship between means and ends, showcasing Machiavelli’s exploration of morality and political action.
Machiavelli’s Times
Italy during Machiavelli’s lifetime was politically fragmented, with the peninsula divided into city-states such as Florence, Milan, Naples, and the Papal territories.
Florence itself faced internal instability under the corrupt and oppressive Medici regime.
Externally, Florence and other Italian city-states were vulnerable to invasion and influence from foreign powers like France and Spain.
The rise of powerful monarchies across Europe, such as those in England, France, and Spain, contrasted with Italy’s failure to consolidate power and unity.
These conditions shaped Machiavelli’s political thought, particularly his focus on the need for Italy to unify in order to resist foreign domination and internal strife.
Political Vision for Italy
Machiavelli believed that Italy’s disunity and internal divisions made it vulnerable to external threats and prevented it from achieving political and military strength.
His ideal was a united Italy, where a strong central authority could protect the state’s interests and ensure its security.
This vision of political unity and strength underpinned much of Machiavelli’s writings and his advocacy for strong leadership, often through pragmatic, even ruthless, methods.
Conclusion
Machiavelli’s ideas must be understood within the context of the Renaissance, a time of intellectual and political transformation. The rise of secularism, individualism, and humanism during this period directly influenced his thoughts on politics and governance. His life and career, marked by diplomatic and administrative service in Florence, provided him with a firsthand understanding of the complexities of statecraft. In his works, Machiavelli argued for the necessity of strong, pragmatic leadership to secure the unity and security of the state. His advocacy for Italian unification and his insights into the nature of power and politics remain foundational to modern political theory.
7.2 Machiavelli’s Attitude Towards Politics and Morality
7.2.1 Machiavelli’s Conception of Human Nature
7.2.2 Power and Politics
7.2.3 Religion as a Political Tool
7.2.4 Double Standards of Morality: Public and Private
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)
- Machiavelli’s Patriotism
Desire for stability, peace, and prosperity in homeland
Used history to understand contemporary politics
Historical patterns as solutions for modern issues
- Human Nature
Pessimistic view of human nature
Men driven by emotion, desire, and self-interest
No inclination towards morality; selfish desires dominate
- Politics & Power
Focused on the acquisition and maintenance of power
Separation of politics from morality and religion
Politics seen as a tool to strengthen the state
- Religion as a Tool
Viewed religion as a political instrument
Used to enforce laws and maintain state power
Emphasis on public utility of religion, not doctrinal value
- Morality in Politics
Two sets of moral standards: public vs private
Rulers not bound by conventional morality
Ends justify the means for political success
- State Above Morality
The state is amoral, not bound by individual ethics
Justification of immoral actions for state security
- Machiavelli’s Methods
Political pragmatism over idealism
Focus on power, control, and political maneuvering
Mnemonic
“Politics Has Power Regulated by Morality, State Above Morals”
(PHP RM SA)
Main Answer (500+ words)
Introduction
Niccolò Machiavelli, a prominent political thinker, had a unique approach to politics that focused on the pragmatic acquisition and retention of power. His views, shaped by his patriotic desire for stability and prosperity for his homeland, Italy, separated politics from traditional morality and religion. Machiavelli’s ideas on human nature, power, and politics laid the groundwork for modern political realism. His famous works, particularly The Prince, emphasize the importance of effective statecraft, even at the cost of conventional ethical considerations.
Body
- Machiavelli’s Patriotism and Historical Approach
Machiavelli sought the unification of Italy, reflecting a strong desire for stability and prosperity in his homeland. He believed that contemporary politics could be better understood through history.
His study of ancient Rome, especially the works of Titus Livy, was aimed at understanding the rise and fall of political power. He believed that historical patterns repeated over time, and thus, studying history could provide solutions to modern issues.
Machiavelli’s ultimate goal was to emulate Rome’s imperial power, guiding Florence to similar glory through a strong and centralized state.
- Human Nature: Pessimistic View
Unlike Aristotle and medieval thinkers, Machiavelli had a more pessimistic view of human nature. He believed that humans were driven primarily by emotions and selfish desires, rather than a sense of morality.
Machiavelli argued that men were inherently unreasonable, often guided by passions rather than rationality. They were always seeking to satisfy their desires, with a significant focus on private property and personal gains.
This view of human nature influenced Machiavelli’s political theory, especially his belief that rulers could not rely on human virtue or morality to maintain control.
- Politics and Power: The Core of Machiavelli’s Theory
Machiavelli’s central political concern was the acquisition, maintenance, and expansion of power. He saw politics as an art focused on statecraft, and not tied to higher moral ideals.
Unlike philosophers like Aristotle, who viewed politics as a means to achieve a moral good, Machiavelli separated morality from politics. He believed that politics had its own set of rules, where the end (political power) justified the means.
Machiavelli famously asserted that a ruler must be willing to abandon traditional virtues, like honesty and compassion, to maintain power. Political success often required ruthlessness, deceit, and manipulation, and these means were acceptable if they secured the state’s survival.
- Religion: A Political Tool
Although Machiavelli did not place religious doctrines at the center of his political theory, he acknowledged the instrumental value of religion in statecraft.
He viewed religion as a tool for maintaining law, order, and political stability. Religious beliefs, particularly the fear of divine punishment, could be used to control the masses and promote adherence to state laws.
Even if Machiavelli was skeptical of religion’s moral truths, he recognized its effectiveness in securing political ends. A ruler should promote religion to maintain public order and support for the state.
- Morality in Politics: Public vs. Private
Machiavelli argued that rulers could not be judged by conventional morality. His famous aphorism, “The ends justify the means,” reflected his belief that political success often required actions that would be considered immoral in private life.
He proposed a double standard of morality: one for the ruler, who could use any means necessary for the state’s survival, and another for ordinary citizens, who were expected to adhere to moral norms.
In times of peace, a ruler might demonstrate virtuous qualities like compassion or justice, but in times of crisis, the same ruler could employ force, deceit, or manipulation to maintain control.
- The State Above Morality
Machiavelli placed the state above morality, arguing that the state was an entity unto itself, not bound by individual ethical principles. Actions that might be considered immoral for a person (e.g., lying or violence) were justified for the ruler if they served the state’s interests.
The ultimate goal of the state, according to Machiavelli, was to ensure security, stability, and power. This justification of “immoral” actions was grounded in the belief that the state’s well-being superseded conventional ethical concerns.
Conclusion
Machiavelli’s views on politics, power, and morality revolutionized political theory by separating politics from morality and religion. His focus on power politics, human nature, and pragmatic statecraft laid the foundations for modern political realism. While his ideas are often controversial, Machiavelli’s work remains an essential study for understanding the complexities of political leadership and governance. Ultimately, his perspective emphasized that the success of the state and the ruler’s power were paramount, even if it meant employing ruthless, immoral methods.
7.2.2 Power and Politics
2. How did Machiavelli look at the concept of politics?
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)
- Renaissance Influence
Rise of individualism and self-assertion
Rejection of medieval universalism in Church and State
Power as a new ideal and end in itself
- Separation of Politics from Morality
Machiavelli’s break with earlier thinkers (e.g., Aristotle)
Politics as a means to power, not moral good
Focus on power acquisition, retention, and expansion
- Power and Authority
Correlation between power and authority
Power not tied to personal virtue
Ruler’s primary concern is maintaining power
- Machiavelli’s View on Morality
Rejection of moralistic politics
Pursuit of individual well-being, including power and fame
Rejection of humility, lowliness, and Christian virtues
- Use of Violence and Deception
Advocacy of violence and brutality for political stability
Deception and hypocrisy seen as necessary for rulers
A ruler must be flexible in applying morality, based on circumstances
- Religion as a Tool for Power
Religion used as a tool for state policy
Religious sentiments help maintain order and control
Religious influence seen as key to political success
Mnemonic
“Rejecting Standard Principles, Authority Maintained through Violence and Religion”
(RSP AM VR)
Main Answer (500+ words)
Introduction
Machiavelli’s approach to politics, as illustrated in his works such as The Prince, diverged sharply from earlier political theorists. His views were deeply influenced by the Renaissance, which heralded a shift in values towards individualism, power, and pragmatism. Unlike thinkers like Aristotle, who integrated morality with politics, Machiavelli saw politics as a distinct realm where the pursuit of power, not virtue, was paramount. His political theory emphasized that the ultimate goal of the ruler is not to achieve moral goodness but to acquire, maintain, and expand power.
Body
- Renaissance and Individualism
The Renaissance, with its rejection of medieval thought, gave rise to individualism, placing emphasis on personal success and power.
This period saw the decline of the Church’s influence on politics, replacing the universalism of medieval thinking with a focus on the individual. Machiavelli embraced this shift, where success was measured by self-assertion, ruthlessness, and the acquisition of power.
Power became the central aim, replacing the pursuit of moral or spiritual ideals.
- Separation of Politics and Morality
In contrast to thinkers like Aristotle, who believed in the moral purpose of politics, Machiavelli argued that politics was not inherently tied to morality.
For Machiavelli, the state’s power was an end in itself. He believed that the success of a ruler should be judged by how well they manage to secure and expand the power of the state.
Unlike Aristotle’s view that rulers must be virtuous to govern justly, Machiavelli rejected the idea that morality had any role in determining the legitimacy of political power.
- Power and Authority
Machiavelli believed that power and authority were closely linked. A ruler who held power was entitled to exercise it, irrespective of their personal character.
He asserted that the integrity or virtue of a ruler did not necessarily guarantee success in maintaining power. Power, not virtue, was the essential basis for political authority.
The ruler’s primary objective was to secure and maintain power, a focus that often required disregarding traditional moral standards.
- Rejection of Moralistic Politics
In The Prince and The Discourses, Machiavelli argued that the pursuit of individual well-being, including material and non-material goods like power and fame, should be prioritized over Christian virtues like humility or lowliness.
He rejected the moralistic view that rulers should lead based on ethical principles. For Machiavelli, a ruler’s success depended on their ability to act according to the circumstances, not by adhering to traditional notions of morality.
He argued that pursuing greatness required a ruler to disregard ideals of humility and virtue championed by Christianity, and instead focus on achieving practical political outcomes.
- Use of Violence and Deception
Machiavelli did not shy away from advocating for the use of violence, deceit, and hypocrisy in politics. He believed that a ruler must be willing to set aside traditional moralities to preserve the state.
In times of danger or instability, a ruler should be prepared to act ruthlessly, using any means necessary—whether violent or deceptive—to maintain control.
Although he acknowledged that goodness and sincerity were desirable traits for a ruler, he emphasized that a prince must be able to switch between moral and immoral actions depending on the circumstances. This flexibility in applying moral standards was seen as essential for successful statecraft.
- Religion as a Tool for Power
While Machiavelli was critical of religion in the traditional sense, he acknowledged its political utility. He viewed religion as a tool for manipulating public sentiment and reinforcing state policies.
Religion helped enforce laws and maintain control over the population. For Machiavelli, religious sentiments could be used strategically to stabilize the state and promote obedience to the ruler.
He advised rulers to promote religious belief, even if they themselves were indifferent or skeptical, because religion could be leveraged to achieve political goals, such as fostering loyalty and unity among the people.
Conclusion
Machiavelli’s political theory was revolutionary in its emphasis on power above morality. He rejected the idealistic and moralistic notions of earlier political theorists, instead advocating for a politics driven by pragmatism and the unrelenting pursuit of power. In this view, the state’s survival and prosperity depended on a ruler’s ability to use any means necessary, including violence, deceit, and manipulation. Moreover, religion, though not inherently moral, was a powerful tool in securing political stability. Machiavelli’s vision of statecraft, focused on power and pragmatism, has shaped modern political thought and continues to be influential in discussions of realpolitik.
7.2.3 Religion as a Political Tool
- List the reasons why Machiavelli placed the State above morality?
- Why Machiavelli attaches only an instrumental value to religion?
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)
- Religion as a Tool
Machiavelli views religion as a political tool, not for doctrinal virtue.
Uses religion for state stability, control, and law enforcement.
- Influence of Ancient Rome
Religion played a key role in maintaining discipline in ancient Rome.
The fear of divine punishment kept people loyal to the State.
- Religion for Political Ends
Religion serves as a mechanism for rulers to influence citizens’ behavior.
Machiavelli suggests rulers promote religious belief for maintaining order.
- State Above Religion and Morality
The state is the highest form of organization, above individual morality.
State actions are judged by different standards than those for individuals.
- Egoism and Aggression
Religious sentiments are used to control human tendencies (egoism, aggression).
Moral considerations are often secondary to state security.
- Immorality in Statecraft
State is neither moral nor immoral—considered neutral.
Machiavelli justifies immoral actions if they serve the state’s security.
- Social Forces within the State
Religion and morality are forces within, not above, the state.
Statecraft is judged by its impact on peace and security.
Mnemonic
“Religion Influences Rulers, State Above Egoism, Immoral Security”
(RIRSAE IS)
Main Answer
Introduction
Machiavelli’s treatment of religion in political theory highlights its instrumental role in maintaining state power. For Machiavelli, religion was not inherently virtuous but was instead a tool to serve political ends. He viewed religion’s role in society as crucial for ensuring law, order, and the stability of the state. By manipulating religious sentiments, rulers could influence the behavior of citizens, ensuring compliance with civil laws and promoting the prosperity of the state. Religion thus functioned as an effective tool in political strategy.
Body
- Religion as a Political Tool
Machiavelli did not consider religion for its doctrinal or spiritual value; instead, he saw it primarily as a tool for governance.
Religion could be used by the state to influence citizens and maintain order.
By promoting religious beliefs, rulers could ensure that people adhered to civil laws and societal norms, thus creating a stable and strong state.
- Influence of Ancient Rome
Machiavelli admired ancient Rome’s use of religion for maintaining social order.
In Rome, religious sanctions served to enforce loyalty to the state. The fear of divine punishment (hell, evil, and God) kept the Romans obedient to their rulers.
This religious control over people’s behavior helped ensure the stability and power of the Roman state. Machiavelli believed that a similar strategy could be employed by modern rulers to preserve their own states.
- Religion for Political Ends
Religion was seen as an effective mechanism for the state to control its citizens’ behavior and ensure compliance with political authority.
For Machiavelli, religion had no intrinsic value. It was merely a tool used by rulers to achieve political goals.
He advised rulers to promote religious belief, even if they themselves were personally indifferent or atheistic, because the decline of religious reverence could destabilize the state.
- State Above Religion and Morality
Machiavelli placed the state as the highest form of human organization.
The state’s primary concern was the protection and promotion of human welfare, which could not be governed by the same moral rules that apply to individuals.
State actions are judged by a different set of standards: for example, it may be a crime for an individual to kill, but the state might justify killing for the greater good or public safety.
Therefore, Machiavelli viewed the state as a neutral entity—neither moral nor immoral—and not subject to the same ethical constraints that govern individuals.
- Egoism and Aggression
Machiavelli believed that human beings are inherently egoistic and aggressive.
The state, therefore, needed mechanisms (such as religion) to control these tendencies and ensure social order.
Relying solely on moral means would not be enough to control the violent and self-interested behavior of individuals.
In times of crisis or when the state’s security was at risk, moral considerations might be set aside to ensure survival.
- Immorality in Statecraft
Machiavelli argued that the state could adopt immoral means if they were necessary for preserving its security.
Unlike individuals, whose actions are judged by morality, the state operates outside the realm of moral judgment.
The ruler, in Machiavelli’s view, is justified in using deceit, force, and other immoral tactics if these actions ensure the safety and stability of the state.
This neutral stance on morality allowed rulers to take whatever actions were deemed necessary for the greater good of the state, regardless of whether these actions were morally questionable.
- Social Forces within the State
Religion and morality are important social forces within the state, but they are not above or separate from it.
Machiavelli emphasized that the state’s role was to ensure peace and security, and its policies should be judged by their effects on these outcomes.
If a ruler used religion to maintain order or justify certain actions, it was not a matter of religious virtue but of strategic statecraft.
The only criterion for evaluating political actions, according to Machiavelli, was their likely impact on the state’s stability and security.
Conclusion
Machiavelli’s view of religion as a political tool demonstrates his pragmatism in statecraft. Religion, for Machiavelli, was not a moral or spiritual force but a means for ensuring the stability and security of the state. By manipulating religious sentiments, a ruler could influence the behavior of the people, ensuring compliance with the laws and promoting societal order. Furthermore, Machiavelli argued that the state must be judged by different standards than individuals. It was neither moral nor immoral but focused solely on maintaining power and protecting its citizens. In this framework, religion and morality are not above the state, but serve it, as tools to preserve peace and security.
7.2.4 Double Standards of Morality: Public and Private
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)
- Dual Morality
Machiavelli proposes two moral codes: one for rulers, another for citizens.
- Justification of Means
Ends justify the means for rulers, especially in statecraft.
Rulers may use immoral methods to ensure state security.
- Role of Rulers
Rulers judged by success in protecting the state, not by conventional morality.
Flexibility in conduct based on the state’s needs.
- Public vs Private Morality
Public (ruler’s) morality differs from private (citizens’) morality.
Rulers may break moral norms for the greater good of the state.
- Moral Standards for Individuals
Individuals should maintain traditional moral values (honesty, loyalty).
State leaders, however, need to be adaptable and pragmatic.
- Flexibility in Leadership
Ruler may act morally in peaceful times and immorally during crises.
The ruler should balance power between kindness and force.
- The Lion and the Fox
Ruler must combine strength (lion) and cunning (fox) to succeed in politics.
Mnemonic
“Dual Judgment Rules Politics, Private Morality Flexes Lions and Foxes”
(DJR PPM FLF)
Main Answer
Introduction
Machiavelli’s theory of morality proposes a dual standard for rulers and citizens. He argued that, in the realm of statecraft, the safety and security of the state justifies the use of any means, including actions that would be considered immoral for individuals. This distinction between public (ruler’s) and private (individual’s) morality forms a core part of Machiavelli’s political thought.
Body
- Dual Morality
Machiavelli presents two types of morality: one for the ruler and one for ordinary citizens.
In his view, state actions cannot be judged using individual morals, as the state operates under a different set of criteria.
While lying might be considered immoral for a citizen, it may be necessary for a ruler if it serves the state’s interest.
- Justification of Means
Machiavelli adheres to the idea that “the ends justify the means.”
For the ruler, any action that ensures the state’s survival, expansion, and security is justified, even if it involves morally questionable tactics.
This pragmatic approach allows rulers to act in ways that would be deemed unethical in other contexts, reflecting the priority of the state’s wellbeing.
- Role of Rulers
Rulers must be judged not by conventional moral standards but by their success in achieving practical goals: protecting the state and serving the citizens.
Machiavelli emphasized the importance of flexibility in leadership. The ruler’s decisions should align with the circumstances and needs of the state.
For example, while upholding high moral values is important in times of peace, a ruler may have to resort to less moral means (e.g., force, manipulation) in times of crisis.
- Public vs Private Morality
Public morality, in the context of a ruler, differs from private morality.
A ruler may need to break traditional moral norms (such as lying or using force) if it serves the greater good of the state.
This contrasts with private citizens, who should adhere to societal moral values like honesty, loyalty, and simplicity in their daily lives.
- Moral Standards for Individuals
Individuals are expected to maintain moral standards like trust, loyalty, and honesty, which are nurtured by family or religious teachings.
However, for rulers, Machiavelli advocates a more flexible approach to morality. The primary concern for the ruler is the stability and success of the state, which may require bending or abandoning conventional morality.
- Flexibility in Leadership
Machiavelli highlights the necessity for rulers to adapt their moral stance depending on the situation.
In times of peace and stability, the ruler should embody virtues like compassion and faith, but when facing chaos or lawlessness, the ruler may need to be ruthless and use force.
In short, politics requires adaptability: what is morally acceptable in one scenario may be inappropriate in another.
- The Lion and the Fox
Machiavelli uses the metaphor of the lion and the fox to describe the ideal ruler.
The ruler must possess the strength and courage of a lion to maintain power but also the cunning and trickery of a fox to outsmart adversaries.
A successful ruler balances these qualities, using both force and strategy as the situation demands.
Conclusion
Machiavelli’s theory of double standards in morality asserts that rulers are exempt from conventional ethical constraints in order to preserve the state. Public morality, for rulers, is flexible, with the ultimate goal of safeguarding the state, regardless of the means employed. This approach contrasts sharply with private morality, where individuals are expected to adhere to traditional virtues. By advocating for rulers to combine the strength of the lion and the cunning of the fox, Machiavelli provides a pragmatic blueprint for leadership in which moral considerations are subordinate to the survival and stability of the state.
