Curse

Joon · May 20, 2005, 08:03 PM // 20:03

I've got to get going at the moment, but I thought I'd just start this thread to read the replies when I get back home.

What do you guys think about Machiavelli? The most famous quote of his being "the end justifies the means", what do you think of this? Also what do you think about his most famous work, The Prince?

ethornber · May 20, 2005, 08:05 PM // 20:05

Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince as a sort of job interview, seeking to become a political advisor to the ruler of an Italian city-state during the Rennaissance.

He didn't get the job.

The Prince is a treatise on how to sieze power, but it neglects to give any useful advice on holding power, especially since following the tactics he advises will almost certainly result in a population ready to rise up against you.

Joon · May 21, 2005, 01:01 AM // 01:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethornber

Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince as a sort of job interview, seeking to become a political advisor to the ruler of an Italian city-state during the Rennaissance.

Yes, true. He wrote The Prince for Lorenzo Medici (the second) after being exiled. Niccolo Machiavelli was a loyal ambassador of the Republic for 14 years, so when Medici's came back to power then pointed Machiavelli out as a conspirator.

Quote:

He didn't get the job.

True, he obviously didn't get his old job back; however, he got the job of organizing the militia.

Quote:

The Prince is a treatise on how to sieze power, but it neglects to give any useful advice on holding power, especially since following the tactics he advises will almost certainly result in a population ready to rise up against you.

Not true at all in my opinion. I am very strongly Machiavellian. The Prince guides how to rule in general - before and during. Anyway, I've gotta go but can you elaborate on why you think this will lead to a rebellion and why Machiavellian ways will not work.

SOT · May 21, 2005, 02:48 AM // 02:48

He is dead, so he lost that war.

I think he was a genius ahead of his time though.

ethornber · May 21, 2005, 03:12 AM // 03:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joon

Not true at all in my opinion. I am very strongly Machiavellian. The Prince guides how to rule in general - before and during. Anyway, I've gotta go but can you elaborate on why you think this will lead to a rebellion and why Machiavellian ways will not work.

Telling people you're Machiavellian is the ultimate proof you're not.

Joon · May 21, 2005, 03:23 PM // 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethornber

Telling people you're Machiavellian is the ultimate proof you're not.

Oh, wow. That's very intelligent

ginetti · May 23, 2005, 02:57 AM // 02:57

i started reading it but only got through about 15 pages.

I wish i had the thirst for reading some of you do.

Druadan Winterblade · May 23, 2005, 04:21 PM // 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by ginetti

i started reading it but only got through about 15 pages.

I wish i had the thirst for reading some of you do.

I love to read stuff like that, but it's got to teach me something new every so often, or have me think about something every so often, or have the protagonist (if in novel form) discuss something every so often.

That's why I could read and enjoy Nineteen Eighty-Four easily, but couldn't stand Brave New World. Orwell has his character always thinking about something, writing about something, or describing an aspect of the society to you. Huxley, on the other hand, has Brave New World start out like that, describing the social engineering of the new era, but then the book degenerates into a soap opera.

I've never read any Machiavelli though, but it's the sort of thing I'd love to read.

Joon · May 23, 2005, 07:45 PM // 19:45

Machiavelli is interesting to read.

1984 was good and I agree with you on that point. However, A Brave New World was also just as interesting. Although 1984 might be a little more easier for the reader - A Brave New World is a frightening distopia in which you must read about. It still triggers the mind, just not as "fun".

Devil's Dictionary · May 23, 2005, 08:03 PM // 20:03

Quote:

Huxley, on the other hand, has Brave New World start out like that, describing the social engineering of the new era, but then the book degenerates into a soap opera.

I never liked 1984 because it's anti-socialist propaganda and nothing more. I can't stand propaganda.
I am a big fan of Huxleys' BNW: after I read it I kept thinking whether the society described is really "good" or "bad". After all, everyone there were happy, even the lowly Epsilons; something you cannot say about today's society.
You can argue and discuss BNW for hours because of the contradicting subject not to mention that Aldous is ten times the writer Orwell was. 1984 is, on the other hand, but a slideshow of evils of socialism. I do keep 1984 on my bookcase but I doubt I'll read it again. It's more of a "book to own" than a "book to read".

Dreamsmith · May 23, 2005, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEATH AT THE DOOR

I can't stand propaganda.

Ever read any Heinlein?

I have to agree BNW > 1984. I found Brave New World to be a much more thought-provoking book than 1984. It was also, IMHO, a much more prophetic book. The heavy handed tactics of Big Brother are nowhere near as effective as just keeping people drugged and entertained. (Now hand me my Pepsi, I'm gonna go watch TV...)

Devil's Dictionary · May 23, 2005, 11:40 PM // 23:40

Heeey! I am a fan of Heinlein!

Although I see your point

.