What implications did Machiavelli’s idea of the end justifying the means have for both Renaissance politicians and what implications for politicians today?

BEFORE READING BELOW “I NEED 3 DIFFERENT ANSERS BECAUSE I HAVE TO POST ON THREE DIFFERENT DAYS IN REGARDS TO THE SAME QUESTION” WHAT I HAVE IS ALL IM ABLE TO AFFORD SO PLEASE DON’T SEND FOR A HIGHER MOUNT BECAUSE I DON’T HAVE IT.

The greatest source of Machiavelli’s reputation is, of course, The Prince (1532). The main theme of this short book is that all means may be resorted to for the establishment and preservation of authority — the end justifies the means — and that the worst and most treacherous acts of the ruler are justified by the wickedness and treachery of the governed. Therefore, using what ever means necessary to protect the stability of the state was perfectly logical. So…..read the quote below about Machiavelli and his grondbreaking political theory, and then answer the discussion question below it.

“It has been a common view among political philosophers that there exists a special relationship between moral goodness and legitimate authority. Many authors (especially those who composed mirror-of-princes books or royal advice books during the Middle Ages and Renaissance) believed that the use of political power was only rightful if it was exercised by a ruler whose personal moral character was strictly virtuous. Thus rulers were counseled that if they wanted to succeed—that is, if they desired a long and peaceful reign and aimed to pass their office down to theiroffspring—they must be sure to behave in accordance with conventional standards of ethical goodness. In a sense, it was thought that rulers did well when they did good; they earned the right to be obeyed and respected inasmuch as they showed themselves to be virtuous and morally upright.

It is precisely this moralistic view of authority that Machiavelli criticizes at length in his best-known treatise, The Prince. For Machiavelli, there is no moral basis on which to judge the difference between legitimate and illegitimate uses of power. Rather, authority and power are essentially coequal: whoever has power has the right to command; but goodness does not ensure power and the good person has no more authority by virtue of being good. Thus, in direct opposition to a moralistic theory of politics, Machiavelli says that the only real concern of the political ruler is the acquisition and maintenance of power (although he talks less about power perse than about “maintaining the state.”) In this sense, Machiavelli presents a trenchant criticism of the concept of authority by arguing that the notion of legitimate rights of rulership adds nothing to the actual possession of power. The Prince purports to reflect the self-conscious political realism of an author who is fullyaware—on the basis of direct experience with the Florentine government—thatgoodness and right are not sufficient to win and maintain political office. Machiavelli thus seeks to learn and teach the rules of political power. For Machiavelli, power characteristically defines political activity, and hence it is necessary for any successful ruler to know how power is to be used. Only by means of the proper application of power, Machiavelli believes, can individuals be brought to obey and will the ruler be able to maintain the state in safety and security.” (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/)

What implications did Machiavelli’s idea of the end justifying the means have for both Renasissance politicans and what implications for politicians today?

Order this paper at: www.termpaperchampions.com

Email: support@termpaperchampions.com

Still stressed from student homework?
Get quality assistance from academic writers!