According to Machiavellism, one should always do whatever they can to achieve power. It, therefore, means that the end will justify the means. Basing on this view, it does not matter how immoral, calculating or cruel the means to ascend to power are. When Machiavelli wrote “The Prince” in the 16^th century, he was in political exile. He, therefore, wrote the book that had guidelines on how to attain power as he hoped that a robust sovereign power could take over Florence. His guide to power was revolutionary, and it described ways in which people in authority could be successful. He based this on what he had experienced and not the way that a leader should be. Before his exile, Machiavelli had experienced firsthand the volatility of the political environment in Italy where he was a statesman. He had seen the constant struggles for power that was in Italian city-states, Roman Empire, Spain, and France(“Machiavelli,” 2019).All these experiences, therefore, inspired him to write the book. This paper will take a critical look at Machiavelli’s book, “The Prince” to look at the contrast between the pieces of advice that he would give to state founders as compared to what James Madison proposed as they prepared the US constitution.

In his advice, Madison states that the elective mode of choosing leaders is a characteristic of a Republican government. However, Machiavelli seems to disagree with this as he gives two ways in which princes should ascend to power. The author asserts that princes will rise to power through their ability or luck. Machiavelli argues that although gaining power using one’s strength is difficult, this becomes easier once one is in leadership. He gives an example of Cesare Borgia. He had managed to take over the helm of power by depending on the favor of his father. Machiavelli admires the way Borgia ruled and views him as a model for all leaders. Machiavelli had the chance to experience the type of leadership that Borgia portrayed when he worked as a statesman. He was sent by the Florentine council to have a discussion with Borgia on their relationship with Florence. While on this mission, he saw how Borgia invited his enemies to Senigallia city where he had all of them strangled. This was a clear indication of how ruthless, ambitious and energetic Borgia was. These characteristics impressed Machiavelli. Borgia was highly successful in his ways of leadership, however, his over dependence on the influence and power of his father would lead to his failure. After the sudden death of his father, and his illness, Borgia started to fail in his leadership. It is indicated that “he failed due not to his own fault but because of extraordinary bad luck” (p.52). He, therefore, points across the dangers that are brought about by over dependence on others(Machiavelli, 2003 p.52). Elective positions, thus,encompass depending on the people to trust the quality that you have and obtain enough confidence in them to be able to elect you in as their leader. Machiavelli would dispute this and states that one should ensure that they eliminate their enemies and not depend on anyone on their leadership. As shown by the Borgia’s administration, it is clear that this Duke failed because he was overly dependent on others and particularly his father. This was the cause of his failure, and the death of his father signified his fall.

Machiavelli also seems to disagree with Madison’s advice on leadership where he suggests that management should be given to the people who possess the common good of the public. He argues that the public will always change their rulers with the hope of getting better leadership from a new monarch. However, once they find out that their new leader is worse than their predecessors, they will start to resist. Therefore, Machiavelli argues that a ruler must harm the people that he conquers. He advises that these rulers should ensure that they exterminate the previous rulers to make sure that there is no other threat to their leadership. He states that colonies are beneficial because they only harm a few poor people who do not have the power and are in no position to retaliate and hurt the ruler(p.39). The author gives his ideology that “Whoever helps someone else to power gets ruined” (p.39) while referring to the public. In this, he means that if a ruler must harm their people, they must do it ruthlessly such that they will be in no strength to revenge. The author advises the prince that he should only act humanely when whatever he does will bring him the tangible benefit and not because it is the ethical action to undertake. In this way, Machiavelli’s advice to the prince is on the easiest and most effective way to achieve and maintain power. He does not give any consideration of what is wrong or right. Also, he depicts power as a scarce resource that needs to be grabbed at the slightest opportunity. Thus, this shows that Machiavelli never viewed power in regards to the people. He was more concentrated on the leaders and argues that one should cling to power in whatever means with little or no connections to the people. He is also of the view that one should eliminate their opponents to minimize competition and make their leadership easier.

Madison also advises that a good leader should have the most virtue to pursue the common good of the people.  Machiavelli, on the other hand, seems to have a different view. He states that despite the common belief that princes should always keep their word, experiences has it that those who do not are more successful than the ones who do. He justifies this by saying that since one would not expect another person to keep their word, they should also not honor theirs. He states that a prince should not keep their word when faced with situations where by doing so, they go against their interests. He, however, argues that a prince should ensure that they keep their public image and should always appear religious, merciful and truthful(Machiavelli, Marriott &Celenza, 2003, p.89). This means that the public will not be in a position to see the prince for who he is but as one with high values. Thus, this will give the public a wrong impression of their leader as they will be seeing a person of their word while the prince, on the other hand, will be deceiving the public to keep their image.According to Machiavelli, “Prince has to bear the reputation of being stingy” (p. 89). This is a massive contrast to what Madison advises on a leader having morality.

After going through Machiavelli’s book, it is clear that Madison had different advice on leadership. Machiavelli viewed leadership from a selfish point of view. He was more concentrated on how a ruler will benefit and maintain power. Madison, on the other hand, advised how rulers can use their positions to help the people under them. Machiavelli’s advice is wrong since most of it is presented in total disregard of the wellbeing of the public. He asserts that leaders should be brutal in their leadership and eliminate their opponents to ensure that they are weak and cannot fight back. This goes against humanity and the rules of democracy which believe in the minority having their say and the majority having their way. Madison gives very liberal advice and is what has been used to form the foundation of many leaders across the globe. The people should always have sovereign power and should be able to have their say on administration. Their rights should also be protected to ensure that even the minority can have their say without fear.

In a nutshell, this paper studied how Machiavelli understood leadership and the advice that he gave to rulers on how they should seize the opportunities and their way of maintaining their power. It is clear that the Madison and Machiavelli hold contrasting views on power with Machiavelli supporting a radical position as opposed to the liberal perspective. His stance is more concentrated on the authority being vested on the people while Machiavelli looks at it on the ruler’s point of view. While Madison says that the people need to be served well, Machiavelli, conversely, had the opinion that rulers must hold on to their positions by any means possible.

References

Machiavelli. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/renaissance/machiavelli

Machiavelli, N., Marriott, W., &Celenza, C. (2003). The Prince. Boston: Dante University Press.

 
Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?