http://www.btinternet.com/~glynhughes/squashed/machiavelli.htm (Modified version of the Prince: Important parts)
http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince00.htm (Complete copy of the Prince in PDF)
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/10391 (Essay on various intepretations of Machiavelli)
Do you agree with the politics of the Prince? Why or why not? (5 sentences) - Thesis statement and then reasons why/why not
REMEMBER YOU ONLY HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOVE THE VIDEO SCREEN. DO NOT USE THE NORMAL BLOG DIRECTIONS YET. I WILL BEGIN THAT PROCESS NEXT WEEK. GOOD LUCK!
22 comments:
The Policy of the Prince, is well stated; to have one man represent Italy. Having one man represent Italy against foreign invaders will have the citizens on their side, for example. Say, Italy would have one ruler except for many, with everyone supporting him. This would help the country more because even citizens will fight for their own soil; but the means of having the "one man" can get extreme, to the point in which treachery, betrayal, and tyranny are introduced. Having many rulers of states is a problem because what if they don't agree with the head state, that would cause conflict within the nation. Even though, I still agree with having one man as the representative against foreign invaders.
The politics of the prince had a great influence from the renaissance till today. The prince had to be very wise he needed to be kind so that people would listen and agree with him, he should be religious so that people could look up to him and trust that he will do good deeds, and he should also be strict so that people will listen to him and follow his ways. You need a leader to keep things stable and not cause chaos. The leader should also have people to help him so he won’t be overwhelmed and he can have other opinions with what to do. Like in Italy there was a prince but with others to help and support him especially when an invasion came the prince could count on others to be supportive and protect Italy. The prince should also know not to be too bossy because others might not like that and might turn against the prince.
-Although Italy is a strong country, having one man represent them will improve them as a whole.
-I think Italy is making the right choice in having one man symbolize them. Because he can make them become more united if the people feel like they all had a part in picking their leader. If he religious, fearless, and good but knows how to be evil the people will have faith in him to protect them from invaders. Also the prince asks the people for help when he is weighed down with issues. But if gets too arrogant the prince needs to watch out because the nobles can turn against him and he will lose his throne.
Wow, I sure thought that this activity was due today. Maybe my computer is just hiding all of the other students who responded. Lets go AP Euro don't let us down. Make it happen. Also be sure to address the question directly and don't dance around it. When we say do you agree or disagree with the Politics of the Prince we are referring to Machiavelli's ideas about how a state should be governed by a "Prince" aka leader.
I agree with the qualitys of the prince, a leader should be kind, however, they also need to instill fear in their subjects, without fear a ruler caanot govern his people without haveing to worry about people takeing advantage of them. they would also loose power, and authority, the people would have a good excuse in saying that the king was a poor and weak leader.
The politics of the prince is a good choice. Having one prince will not cause controversy between ideas or suggestions. Everyone would need to follow this one ruler and what he says because there would be nobody else to turn to. The prince would need to be kind so that he could have people on his side and he would need to be wise to make the correct desicions. He would also need to imply fear in his ruling to gain the respect from others. The prince needs to imply this but also be careful becaues he may have people turn against him if he is not a strong leader.
The Politics of the Prince were very important in the Renaissance and even today in soceity. Most of the famous kings and princes of the Renaissance only became famous because of their well-known family members. Just like today in society, basically if you your related to the right type of famous you are most likely to make it big in the world. Also in the Renaissance, there were many famous characters that rose to fame and fortune too fast and fell down too fast because they did not know how to handle it. Just like today with all the celebrities who spend their money way faster than they make it, like Gary Coleman, he spent his childhood fortunes way too fast and now he has nothing. Laslty the Policy of the Prince presented that to have a strong kingdom or united region you must first have a good foundation of government to support them. Just like now... say we didn't have a strong government, everything under that like would crumble and fall. Say evrything to do with politics fell, well because if our president fell apart then our economical status would be going crazy, therefore prices will go up, peolple will loose their jobs, just because we didn't have a strong foundation. And the Policy of the Prince addressed this back then and is still being addressed today.
Niccolo Machiavelli's Politics of the Prince, the how-to book for leaders, is precise. For a leader to succeed in ruling a nation, he must have the three main qualities presented by Machiavelli. It does not matter if one is loved or hated, though one must do his best to seem worthy of being loved for the people to accept him. Though, when to his benefit, man will break bonds and abandon which is why it is neccessary to make oneself respected by fear. Fear is far more effective and "preserves you by a dread of punishment which [unfortunately] never fails." If a people did not fear their leader, they would do as they please and chaos would be presented. (Think a classroom without a teacher.) I do not mean that a ruler should always be cruel, but should know when to use cruelty, which is exactly what Machiavelli said. Sadly, this book can be used by both good and bad, helping tyrants as well as a prince.
Even though the Politics of the Prince was written several years ago, I agree with the points Machiavelli makes. The first reason why is because the book points out that a leader needs to be understanding, but feared. If he doesn’t show compassion to his subjects he will be turned on, but on the same note if he isn’t feared he won’t have the power needed to control the country. Finally, if there is multiple leaders people would have to decide who to follow, causing conflict within the nation. If there is only one people will follow without confusion and without conflict. The politics of the prince makes some great statements that are still used today, and overall I do agree with it, even among the statements I didn’t agree with.
While the idea of having just one ruler may seem nearly impossible, I agree with the politics of the prince. Having one ruler is preferred over several because if there is more than one authority, it may cause conflict between both authorities. This can cause war and a division of the public. However, the ruler should enforce its power without overpowering the people. The ruler should make decisions that pertain to the whole public/government. This meaning that the ruler should try as best as possible to include the people in decision making. A good ruler should have the ability of a fox and lion, meaning that they should have the ability to perform aspects like a fox and courageous like a lion.
I do not agree with the politics of the Prince. Rulers should be honest, truthful, but have great control over themselves and their subjects. Of, course this is not how rulers run their office but it is how they should. Rulers should not have to lie and cheat to get to where they want. They should be awarded with it on their own merits.
The politics of the Prince makes a good point, a leader should have the ability to act boldy, be able to protect his power, and appear unwavering while being flexable. A leader should hold firm to what he believes in yet should not be so stiff as to care less of what others opinions are. "To gain and keep power" machiavelli makes a strong point to do just that. Being a leader holds much more than just power though, it holds respect and i think he writes for leaders to just that.
The politics of the prince is a good guide on how a country should be ran. One person should be selected by the people to rule. That leader needs to be able to connect with the people and be kind at times. But he also needs to be able to lay down the law if necessary. It is like being a parent with alot of kids
The policy of the Prince is a guide that has been used for 100's of years by different leaders.The policies are very useful, but it depends how the ruler or leader decides to understand them. The Prince says that a Prince should be a fox and a lion, which is true. A Prince should be loved and respected but also should know how to be sly. If he is truly a good Prince he would know how to do this and he would be loved by many. Also i agree that there should be one leader instead of many. One leader can be stronger then many because he knows what he is doing instead of worring about what the others are doing.
I am ambivalent about the "Politics of the Prince". I believe that any province especially the Italian city states which at that time was run in turmoil needs a strong ruler who will instill fear in his subjects, but show compassion when the time called for it. Coincidentally, i believe that rulers have tendencies to show tyranny and fill entire governments with opression. A ruler should be used in the most dire situations and should be elected by the people rather than chose upon heirs.
I blieve in the Polocy of the Prince. To be a good learder you need to do whatever it takes to get respect. Even if your respect is from fear. If someone is afarid of you then they won't try to go against you. The leader also needs to be smart bacuase if they aren't they won't make wise choices. Also people might use that to there advantage and try to over run the leader. He must also be couragous if he is not then his people will be in troble in times of war.
The idea of the politics of the prince are true. One man can lead a whole country as long as he is feared. In order for one person to lead an entire country, he will need fear. If he is not feared by his "people" he will not be able to be a good leader. Like it says in a quote by Machiavelli, "He who wishes to be obeyed must know how to command." In this quote he is saying that if you want people to follow you, you must know how to make them follow you.Machiavelli was a man that knew how to get the job done. He knew that you cannot always worry about what is right and wrong, but do what must be done for the country.
The Policy of the Prince, that Machiavelli, stated that all princes should be feared and should instill fear into others. Those would be some good traits of a prince but I bet that was rare. Also if you were feared, people would probably listen to you more and agree with you, because they would be scared. So i believe that Machiavelli, has a good point on what a prince should be.
The Politics of the Prince has great points to it, but then also had great flaws. I disagree to Machiavelli's point on how a leader should run the city-state. He advised leaders to use any methods necessary to become powerful and successful. The thought of a leader be ruthless to maintain his power is unthinkable. This may be the reason that tyranny was present in the renaissance era.
The politics of the Prince made great sense in his idea. It would be better to have one leader over several. The Prince should only contain and make the strong decisions rather than having other leaders causing conflict. Other leaders would cause too many issues and conflict for anyone to handle. All together it would just make more sense if there was one leader instead of several.
The Policy of the Prince took a great role in the Rennaisance and still todays takes a good role in society. Back in the Rennaisance the only reason that princes or any rulers were popular were becasue of the name and there well liked family member. To be a prince you should be liked as an induvidual not as your father or grandparent, you should try your best to show people the real you not your family member. Niccolo Machiavelli's how to become a prince are things that are needed to become that prince. Princes should be strong and fearfula dn not have to wory about people trying to take them over.
Post a Comment