The Prince in Regards to Application and Modernity

At its most basic element, The Prince is simply a discourse on the most proper way to seize and maintain a state. Most of the guidelines presented by Machiavelli have retained their relevance to the modern day because, although the rules of politics have changed since his time, the basic dynamics remain the same. However, beyond the parameters of governing, when the various implications of the text are taken into account his words become applicable to most any position of leadership. In order to gain success it is absolutely necessary to be capable of behaving in a Machiavellian manner. Or, to further clarify, one must be willing to not only be cunning, but duplicitous as well when the necessity arises. Additionally, with any job that has potential for advancement, it is necessary to be able to assert oneself and, on occasion, behave with what Machiavelli describes as “meanness”.  Without this “meanness” it is impossible to gain power or position. That being the case, if one lacks the willingness to take necessary action, than it will also prove difficult to maintain effective governance. A person who is indecisive and mild will never gain power. And, even if he does manage to gain a foothold, he will not be able to sustain his position for long.

               
 Machiavelli’s realpolitik is simply practical. After recognizing the attributes that the populace desires from its leaders and the attributes that are necessary to rule, he comes to a consensus that satisfies both needs. The consensus being that one must appear in a certain way so as to garner the respect of the populace, but behave alternatively in order to maintain the prosperity of the state. It is interesting to note that no specific type of person is necessary for his instructions to work, only someone who can uphold these two needs.  Essentially, so long as one can follow his directions, any person can lead with relative security. In the case of modern politics, especially in republics and democracies, popularity and appearance are crucial to both challengers and incumbents alike. Every politician desires to appear as an ally of the people; however, it should be understood that, even if said politician secures office, it will be impossible to satisfy the populace’s every need. The objective of government is not to appease every whim of the masses, which would swiftly bring the body to ruin, but to govern in a way that is most beneficial for the country as a whole.

 The democratic system of government allows for corruption to easily slip through in part to the popular vote. Given that the general population seems to have little incentive to research candidates, instead being in favor of the mass media’s perspective, how should the government generate interest? Why would the government want a more educated populace? What would be the disadvantages to having a population that understood the inner workings of politics? Would it be more or less efficient?