Customer Reviews

The Prince (Bantam Classics)

5 star:		(124)
4 star:		(44)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(9)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

There are two good reasons to read Machiavelli's classic, "The Prince."

First, so you'll know what everyone is referring to when you come across the adjective "machiavellian" in news stories or other media. This adjective has become so commonplace (and overused) it is almost a cliche. Also, most who use it have never read this letter from Machiavelli, a Rennaisance courtier to his Prince (written from prison), but they insist on peppering writings with this noun turned adjective so much that as a matter of clearly understanding what is meant by the term, famiality with this brief treatise is helpful.

Second, this book does describe most (not all) power situations very well. From politics to corporations to most settings where advancement, influence and control exist, Machiavelli's observations and rules apply.

You will also discover that Machiavelli was not as evil as he is understood to be in popular thought. What he was doing was describing the rules of the game that have existed and always will exist for many situations involving selfish humans in competition. Machiavelli's rules are neither good nor bad in themselves -- they describe a process. What is good or bad is how those who master Machiavelli's rules use their power and position, in a society that tempers actions according to law and basic Judeo-Christian principals. When those principals do not exist (as in Nazi Germany, the Middle Ages or under Communism, or by those who refuse to live by these constraints), Machiavelli's rules take on their demonic and evil cloak; usually because they serve demonic and evil ends. In societies where positive constraints exist, for example the U.S. political system, Machiavellian behavior can produce excellent results. A good example involves Abraham Lincoln, whose ambition led him to use every legitimate trick and stragety to master (and remove) political opponents. His mastery of Machiavellian behavior constrained by the US political system allowed him to save the Union and end slavery.

To fully appreciate the modern lessons that can be taken from this writing, one must translate Medieval sensibilites to their contemporary counterparts. The casual way in which Machiavelli discusses the need to kill opponents was necessary to those who wished to be princes 500 years ago. Today, of course, "killing" is translated as rendering less powerful, or taking an opponent out of the game.

What does one get from this book? It is a roadmap with insights and lessons about how to 1) get ahead of others to attain power; and 2) maintain and expand one's power in the face of others who would usurp one who is in a desirable position.

This book is about ruthlessness and putting the attainment of goals ahead of any other consideration. Plenty of maxims that are also tossed about frequently in media are to be found in Machiavelli's book: "the end justifies the means," "it is better to be feared than loved," "if you fight the prince, kill the prince" to name a few.

It is essential reading to anyone who would be in a competitive environment and hope to advance, if for no other reason than many of one's competitors operate by Machiavelli's dictums (which arise out of human instinct and selfishness). One does not have to operate according to Machaivelli's code -- many examples of alturism and "pluck and luck" exist to defeat any claim that Machiavelli's road map is essential for success. However, human nature and human history deliver far more examples of ruthless self-interest (Machiavellianism) behind success in power situations.

Is Machiavellianism bad? Not in and of itself. Remember, one must translate the Middle Age ethos to current practices -- there usually isn't blood spilled as a result of today's Machiavellian duels, just power and positon. Most political and business leaders are at least partly Machiavellian. The trick is using one's power to good ends. Thus, even though Lincoln and all of our presidents were Machiavellian in their climb to the White House, some of them did darn good work there. The same is true for business leaders. Jack Welch (GE), Bill Gates (Microsoft), anyone who advances past the first few rungs of the corporate ladder or dominates markets at the expense of competitors is using Machiavelli's dictums. The trick of a just and good society is to set the bounds by which power can be attained and exercised so that good and benefits will flow from those who are able to "claw their way to the top."

To summarize, read this book if you want to 1) truly understand when the adjective "Machiavelli" is used to describe people and 2) understand the rules by which most people navigate their way to power.

Based upon Michiavelli's first hand experience as an emissary of the Florentine Republic to the courts of Europe The Prince analyzes the often violent means by which political power is seized and retained, and the circumstance in which it is lost. Because The Prince is a political commentary, and not a work of fiction, Michiavelli does not use "characters" in the sense of a novel or a short story. Instead he draws his examples from the current political and social events, as well as from history. His characters are the political leaders of his time. The book is a declaration in plain language the conduct of great men and the principles of princely governments. The book can be divided into four sections.

1. The types of principalities. Michiavelli lists four types of principalities.

* Hereditary principalities, which are inherited by the ruler.

* Mixed principalities, territories that are annexed to the rulers existing territories.

* New principalities which may be acquired by several methods: by own power, by the power of others by criminal acts or extreme cruelty, or by the will of the people

* Ecclesiastical principalities, namely the papal states belonging to the catholic churches.

2. The character and behavior of the prince. Michiavelli recommends the following character and behavior for princes:

* It is better to be miserly than generous.

* It is better to be cruel than merciful.

* It is better to break promises if keeping than would be against ones interest.

* Princes must avoid making them hated and despised; the goodwill of the people is a better defense than any fortress.

* Princes should undertake great projects to enhance their reputation.

* Princes should choose wise advisors to confide and consult with

3. The types of armies A prince must always pay close attention to military affairs if he wants to remain in power. A prince must lay good foundation and those foundations include good laws and good armies. There cannot be good laws without good armies, and where there are good laws there must be good armies. The study of war should be a prince's main goal, for war is a rulers only art.If princes become too refined to study this art they loose their state. The types of armies are:

* Mercenaries or Auxiliaries (loaned to you by another ruler) are both dangerous and unreliable, as they will maintain their interests preceding yours.

* Native troops composed of ones own citizens or subjects are by far the most desirable kind.

4. Italy's political situation Michiavelli outlines and recommends the following

* The rulers of Italy have lost their states by ignoring the political and military principles.

* Fortune controls half of human affairs, but free will controls the rest, leaving the prince free to act. However, the few princes can adopt their actions to times

"The Prince" is one of the view books from college that I've actually kept. It is splendid reading on several levels. First, one appreciates Machiavelli as a problem solver. Italy is divided; what is the most practical and efficient means for a wise prince to consolidate his power and unify it? But one also appreciates Machiavelli as a person. A florentine intellectual banished to the countryside--it wouldn't be a bad life for some of us, but to him it must have been torture.

I was once asked whether Machiavelli was a cynic, a realist, or a patriot, and I believe the correct answer is all three. Much of Machiavelli's advice contains an under current of cynicism and ruthlessness, and this has undoubtedly come to be the dominant portion of his reputation. One of the terms for devil, "Old Nick" is derived from Machiavelli. When one speaks of destroying an enemy or performing a ruthless, sneaky act, that person is likely to be called "machiavellian". But Machiavelli's advice was as realistic as one could get in those times. This was an era when despots and mercenaries ruled by force and assasination. It was a time when popes fathered children and carved out little principalities for themselves. One was not going to remain in power, much less get ahead of one's enemies by being virtuous. It isn't that Machiavelli despised virtue so much as he realized how useless it was in the political context of the times. But in the end Machiavelli was also an idealist. He dreamed of a united Italy under a strong (and practical) prince. When he dedicated his treatise to Rodorigo Borgia, he did so in the hopes that he might be the man to perform such a task.

This book provides timeless practical advice for anyone who wishes to succeed in a hostile, divisive environment. It also illuminates the peculiar political circumstances of Renaissance Italy.

Based upon Michiavelli's first hand experience as an emissary of the Florentine Republic to the courts of Europe The Prince analyzes the often violent means by which political power is seized and retained, and the circumstance in which it is lost. Because The Prince is a political commentary, and not a work of fiction, Michiavelli does not use "characters" in the sense of a novel or a short story. Instead he draws his examples from the current political and social events, as well as from history. His characters are the political leaders of his time. The book is a declaration in plain language the conduct of great men and the principles of princely governments. The book can be divided into four sections.

1. The types of principalities. Michiavelli lists four types of principalities.

* Hereditary principalities, which are inherited by the ruler.

* Mixed principalities, territories that are annexed to the rulers existing territories.

* New principalities which may be acquired by several methods: by own power, by the power of others by criminal acts or extreme cruelty, or by the will of the people

* Ecclesiastical principalities, namely the papal states belonging to the catholic churches.

2. The character and behavior of the prince. Michiavelli recommends the following character and behavior for princes:

* It is better to be miserly than generous.

* It is better to be cruel than merciful.

* It is better to break promises if keeping than would be against ones interest.

* Princes must avoid making them hated and despised; the goodwill of the people is a better defense than any fortress.

* Princes should undertake great projects to enhance their reputation.

* Princes should choose wise advisors to confide and consult with

3. The types of armies A prince must always pay close attention to military affairs if he wants to remain in power. A prince must lay good foundation and those foundations include good laws and good armies. There cannot be good laws without good armies, and where there are good laws there must be good armies. The study of war should be a prince's main goal, for war is a rulers only art.If princes become too refined to study this art they loose their state. The types of armies are:

* Mercenaries or Auxiliaries (loaned to you by another ruler) are both dangerous and unreliable, as they will maintain their interests preceding yours.

* Native troops composed of ones own citizens or subjects are by far the most desirable kind.

4. Italy's political situation Michiavelli outlines and recommends the following

* The rulers of Italy have lost their states by ignoring the political and military principles.

* Fortune controls half of human affairs, but free will controls the rest, leaving the prince free to act. However, the few princes can adopt their actions to times

After being described as Machiavellian by some of the fellow members of my youth government group, I decided to find out what they meant. I soon discovered that to be Machiavellian, is to be " a person having ruthless ambition, craftiness, and merciless political tactics." I took this comparison as a compliment and learned more Niccolo Machiavelli by reading one of his books, The Prince. The Prince begins with an in-depth historical introduction by Christian Gauss discussing the history of Italy. This background is essential so that readers have a basic understanding of where Machiavelli was coming from with his ideas. Machiavelli, a son of a Florentine lawyer, lived back in the 16th Century. He was a humanist and grew up reading the works of the Romans and the Greeks. It was because of his studies that he was able to analyze history and formulate his own theories on ruling a nation. Following this introduction, Machiavelli essentially provides the first ever "idiots guide to ruling a country" in 26 chapters. Within these chapters he answers questions such as whether it is better to be hated by the people or loved by the aristocracy, whether one should raise armies within a nation or hirer mercenaries, and what happens when you rule as a villain. Machiavelli's philosophy on every aspect of ruling a nation is discussed within this novel. The best part of this novel is how straightforward Machiavelli was in his writing. He cuts the fluff, and is blunt with his points. He is also very original in his thoughts about power. He does not try to conceal the political motives. In one section Machiavelli clearly presents his view on the importance for a prince to have religion:

Whoever reads Roman history attentively will see in how great a degree religion served in the command of the armies, in uniting the people and keeping them well conducted, and in covering the wicked with shame. (Machiavelli, pg. 78)

In this quote, Machiavelli never talks about how spirituality is important in satiating a God. Instead he talks about how a ruler can take advantage of a religion's power to be a massive propaganda machine. This is just the way Machiavelli presents his ideas. His views are often described as ruthless, but I feel they are just honest, accurate reflections of men's motives in politics. When reading the book, the only thing that bothered me was that my knowledge of European history is severely lacking. Frequently within the novel Machiavelli would make references to ancient battles such as the Venetians and France versus the Duke of Milan, or ancient people such as the Spartans, or the Medici. For this reason I would advise taking an AP or College Class in European History. A important insight is lost by a reader without this knowledge in any number of quotes such as this one:

But when one cannot avoid it, as happened in the case of the Florentines when the Pope and Spain went with their armies to attack Lombardy, the prince ought to join for the above reasons. (Machiavelli, pg. 112)

In this quote, I was completely ignorant to the fact that Spain and the Pope ever united, and furthermore that they then attacked a country, Lombardy, one that I had never heard of before. It was just frustrating to read a section and be completely bewildered afterwards, so that is why I suggest having a good knowledge of history before reading this book. By the end of the novel, my mind was racing with Machiavelli's theories on being a great ruler and I was anxious to go out and conquer my own nation. Unfortunately, Machiavelli wrote this a while ago and many of the things he described cannot be implemented today. However, a lot of his basic ideas can still be applied and this serves as an inspiration for me in my quest for power. Even though the days of Princes ruling are dead, anyone from modern day politicians to tech-company owners can appreciate Machiavelli's theories about control of power.

Required reading at many Universities and Business Schools, The Prince is a classic. People the world over continue to show an enduring fascination for Machiavelli, some five hundred years after his death. Equally applicable to political science and business alike, this book is highly recommended for all readers.

Machiavelli's principles, conveyed through The Prince, are timeless; they address a side of human nature not often stated explicitly. By no means `politically correct,' these principles touch the base emotions and desires of politics and everyday life. While greedy and evil as judged by many of today's cultural norms, the eloquent logic and sound arguments contained within The Prince are captivating. The fascination with Machiavelli is likely to endure for centuries to come.

In today's increasingly competitive and global economic climate, the CEOs of large corporations in many ways face the situation found in Italy in the 16th century. As the fervent wave of large mergers and acquisitions continues, Machiavelli's principles become that much more applicable. A "Prince" or the manager of a new company may also find the advice contained within The Prince very useful, however `politically incorrect' this advice may be in today's world.

"The Prince" is one of the view books from college that I've actually kept. It is splendid reading on several levels. First, one appreciates Machiavelli as a problem solver. Italy is divided; what is the most practical and efficient means for a wise prince to consolidate his power and unify it? But one also appreciates Machiavelli as a person. A florentine intellectual banished to the countryside--it wouldn't be a bad life for some of us, but to him it must have been torture.

I was once asked whether Machiavelli was a cynic, a realist, or a patriot, and I believe the correct answer is all three. Much of Machiavelli's advice contains an under current of cynicism and ruthlessness, and this has undoubtedly come to be the dominant portion of his reputation. One of the terms for devil, "Old Nick" is derived from Machiavelli. When one speaks of destroying an enemy or performing a ruthless, sneaky act, that person is likely to be called "machiavellian". But Machiavelli's advice was as realistic as one could get in those times. This was an era when despots and mercenaries ruled by force and assasination. It was a time when popes fathered children and carved out little principalities for themselves. One was not going to remain in power, much less get ahead of one's enemies by being virtuous. It isn't that Machiavelli despised virtue so much as he realized how useless it was in the political context of the times. But in the end Machiavelli was also an idealist. He dreamed of a united Italy under a strong (and practical) prince. When he dedicated his treatise to Rodorigo Borgia, he did so in the hopes that he might be the man to perform such a task.

This book provides timeless practical advice for anyone who wishes to succeed in a hostile, divisive environment. It also illuminates the peculiar political circumstances of Renaissance Italy.

This small yet informative book is the heart of power politics. It was Machiavelli's resume, written to help save both his country and his reputation. The book is often said to present a plan of leadership that is calculating and heartless. That is precisely the point; Machiavelli is a true historian who sets down the hard realities of what it is to be a leader and ignores lofty political ideals (making it obvious how few world leaders have actually studied it). As well as giving the modern reader a much needed history lesson, Machiavelli has a nearly prophetic knack for summing up the root causes of events from the 1st World War to Vietnam in a few sentences. It never fails to amaze me that leaders today would rather look at world events through hindsight than act on them by foresight.

In addition to Donno's excellent translation, this particular edition includes key points from The Discourses, which are guaranteed to astonish the reader with their obvious truth. After reading this numerous times, I found myself highlighting Machiavelli's major points throughout the book. It is not only political instruction but words of wisdom to live by.

The Prince by Machiavelli is not about a "prince" but about principles that a ruler, a king, a president, a prince should follow or manipulate to maintain and keep his kingdom or country. Machiavelli's famous treatise is one of the central texts in the history of political thought and a basic foundation to all principles dealing with "How to rule an acquired or inherited kingdom/country," how to be an effective ruler, and government politics. This book is a response to the florentine politics of Machiavelli's time and to the genre of advice-books for princes. Underneath the generalities of his principles, Machiavelli leaves a sense of admonishment to the ruler and the reader alike.
This treatise was written based on his experience as second Chancery and secretary to the main foreign relations committee of the republic, the so-called Ten of War. His writing style lacks verbosity and florid eloquence; Instead, there is a lucid string of concise words in a coherent and cogent order. The brevity and understatements of his general statements makes it very easy for the reader to follow. In every chapter, he states his thesis for a certain principle and gives examples to prove his point. The principles address important issues such as how to win over people, nobles, and soldiers; accomplish political ambitions and necessities by force or fraud, how to be loved and feared by the people, eliminate those with and without power who can possibly harm the ruler, how to make the government agree with the ruler, when to be austere or munificient, how to establish and maintain loyalty, when to build fortresses and how to build alliances and friendships with other kings and kingdoms. This book will not only instruct the ruler how to be a prince and a good one, but also how to maintain oneself as a ruler over people whose hearts can quickly shift contrary to the ruler.

As a high school student I remember many of my instructors referring to Machiavelli as the author of the famous book on backstabbing for power. After having finally read the Prince, I really wonder where this reputation comes from. Machiavelli makes it clear from the first page that he's writing a guide for taking and maintaining power without any moral considerations getting in the way, but his arguments outline a benevolent authority, not a tyrannical one. In the Discourses (also included in this book), he extols the virtues of the people over the prince.

The Prince and the Discourses both have interesting gems for the modern reader. Machiavelli uses many examples of powerful people and institutions from his time. He expresses almost an atheistic position when discussing religion, and, furthermore, he describes a general disillusionment with religion by the people of Italy. I found all these subtle things quite intriguing and not at all what I would have expected.

Machiavelli writes in a very easy to read style (is this just the translation?) and he presents logical arguments and historical examples to back everything up, but his arguments generally boil down to `because I say so'. I suspect if a modern writer (particularly an academic) wrote this same book, it would be five times longer, with detailed justification for each point made.