Discussion Question for Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince Essay

Discussion Question for Niccolo Machiavellis The Prince - Essay ExampleHe himself was made subject to this, when he lost his bunk in 1512 in the hands of the Medici Family. All these real life experiences led Machiavelli to hold open The Prince which at first was criticized for being barbarous, but later, it was appreciated for all the theories and guidelines of warf atomic number 18 and politics. He easily terminate the old norms of ruling the peck and brought rough a completely new way to run an empire, city or state. In the beginning of the handwriting, Machiavelli very cleverly identifies his readers with the terms and policies that he will be utilise further in the book. The initial chapters are simple and they give the reader an easy introduction into the existence of Machiavelli one that exists on the hard work and effort of the ruler himself and has nothing to do with Divine baulk or whatsoever. Niccolos ideas become very clear initially when he clearly explains th e idea of maintaining a new principality is better than regulateing a hereditary state. He argues that inheriting power and position means that one has to keep up with peoples 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 Princes family to keep control. ... And if his successors had been united they would live with enjoyed it securely and at their ease, for there were no tumults raised in the kingdom except those they provoked themselves. cool 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, severeness and oppression. Hence, the book starts on with why and how a prince shou ld 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 whence there is nothing else that will keep him out of power. But to come to those who, by their own competency 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 Ancient 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 mans support, it is just an factor 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. M achiavelli 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