Introduction
Machiavelli actually favors cruelty by political leaders. Machiavelli was an Italian philosopher who expressed his opinion on leadership. As stated in his seminal work, The Prince, the name Machiavelli frequently conjures up images of ruthlessness and the maxim “the aims justify the means”. Written in 1532, it sought to give a general outline of how political leaders should conduct themselves in order to preserve and solidify political power. After the Florentine Republic was overthrown, Machiavelli used this treatise to advise the Medici family on how Lorenzo de Medici should reign. Although he thought that one should ideally be both feared and loved, he also believed that it is preferable to be feared if one has a choice. A prince who is not feared is more likely to be killed or to expose his nation to invasion. A prince would be seen as weak if he is excessively forgiving. In the long term, being merciful to a select few may end up costing more lives because it makes the prince’s nation more open to invasion. War, for example, necessitates the use of cruelty. He thinks that in order to be seen as a powerful leader and to defend one’s people, one must occasionally be cruel.
Machiavelli and Cruelty
Machiavelli develops a set of ideals for acquiring, holding onto, and maintaining power for the era in which he lived, disregarding morals, religious commandments, and teachings. In reality, he advises his readers to learn to be pragmatic rather than moral, and that they should be concerned about their own positions only for practical reasons. He does not apply the traditional notion of virtue. Instead, he describes it as a set of abilities the prince should possess or learn to keep his position of authority and grandeur (Mokhber 2018). To highlight the greater significance of virtue for a leader, he uses examples of leaders who have attained power by either fortune or virtue. He tells stories of people who once held positions of power through bribery and the use of other people’s influence, but who ultimately failed to hold onto them. This highlights how depending on luck, or fortune, to consolidate power is useless.
Machiavelli continues his study of virtues by examining kindness and cruelty. He bases his decision-making on taking into account what will benefit the most people. Being forgiving is useless if the prince allows the chaos in his realm to spiral out of control. Fewer people are harmed by a small amount of cruelty, but more people are harmed by widespread violence and anarchy. Mercy cannot rightly be considered mercy if it causes the majority of people to suffer. Machiavelli, for instance, lauds Cesare Borgia’s strategy for taming the unruly Romagna province. Because it demonstrates how one must not only rely on their own goodness to consolidate authority, he views him as a role model for everyone who was given power by luck but considers cruelty as a means of control. He extols Cesare’s virtue in his harsh deeds, such as the murder of Ramiro and those who posed a danger to his authority. He also faults the Florentine authorities for not getting involved when civil war broke out in one of their possessions, Pistoia. Despite sending Machiavelli to assess the situation, the Florentines took no action, and as a result, many civilians perished in the war.
Cruelty then practically becomes a must for any leader who wants to hold onto power. It emphasizes how any action committed is legitimate as long as it is for the greater good and is not constrained by moral principles as a means of consolidating power (Cook 2017). Machiavelli does, however, make the point that cruelty must always be justified and not just exploited to one’s advantage. He takes care not to promote brutality for the sake of cruelty. He cautions the prince from consistently wronging his people since doing so will make him despised. Instead, he must only use cruelty when it is necessary to stop bigger wrongs. He makes a contrast between a ruler using cruelty for the benefit of society at large and a dictator who merely abuses brutality. While the former stirs up the people’s love and terror, the latter results in hatred and a loss of support, which leads to empires falling. Another quality required for the maintenance of power is a ruler’s capacity for love and dread. He agrees that it can be challenging to accomplish both, though. It is safer to be feared because men are restrained by dread since they are constantly terrified of punishment.
Agathocles is a wonderful example of how cruelty should be used. Despite being a commoner by birth, he ascended through the ranks, finally becoming the praetor of Syracuse thanks to his virtues and skill in battle. Agathocles makes the decision to become a king and prince in his own right, following man’s innate urge for acquisition. He gathers the city’s most powerful men and slaughters them without justification or provocation. By doing so, he is able to firmly establish himself as the city’s ruler and fend off challenges to his authority. According to Machiavelli, Agathocles can keep his position of authority because he knows when to use violence and only does so once, abstaining from doing it again. He can get the power he wants by violence, while also getting rid of his opponents. His later moderation prevents him from alienating the masses, who only care about their ladies and property.
According to Machiavelli, a prince can get away with doing wicked things if he is doing them for self-preservation, the attainment of power, or the maintenance of that power. He compares upholding the prince’s position to upholding the government. A strong and capable leader will be able to control and guide the populace, successfully defending the country from envious foreigners while upholding internal peace (Rojek 2014, 460). Good governance is only feasible when the state is strong and not split by ineffective, weak leaders. When employed properly, cruelty should in some way help the populace. This standard serves as a check on the actions the ruler may take. Cruel acts must serve the interests of the populace as well as the ruler’s power.
Machiavelli generally took a negative view of human nature, as evidenced by his cautionary tale about those who profess their love for you in good times but forsake you in bad. He thought it was crucial for a leader to be crafty and instill terror in others because most men were not to be trusted and would betray you if given the chance. Men are loyal to you in this way because none of them want to face the repercussions of betraying you. The claim made by Machiavelli that individuals are more likely to forgive the loss of a loved one than the seizure of their property is the most cynical (McCormick 2012, 720). Being surrounded by these individuals makes a prince safer if he can maintain his dominance over them through fear because love is so ephemeral and unpredictable.
Machiavelli places a strong emphasis on the portrayal of virtue and the idea that a leader must be frightening in order to be respected. This idea is frequently observed in modern politics, particularly in developing nations where leaders seek to solidify their autocratic control (Rodgers 2021,). This was made clear in Libya during the Muammar Gaddafi administration, which was in charge of eradicating any challenge to his rule and responsible for the deaths of thousands of people during the 2011 Arab Spring. Machiavelli correctly predicted a leader’s ability to control the masses through a carefully cultivated image of fear and adulation and the concealed capability of acting maliciously, when necessary, in his premise of human nature.
Conclusion
From the above discussion, Machiavelli appears to favor cruelty by leaders. He opines that for a leader to successfully hold on to power, he or she has to use cruelty as a mode of fear and control. He holds cruel leaders and characters in high regard and exemplifies their cruel approaches to maintaining power. A leader can get away with cruelty as long as it is perceived as a tool of control. However, despite their stance on cruelty, there are instances where cautions leaders who use cruel tactics but only if they take advantage of it and endorse brutality.
References
Cook, William R. 2017. “Machiavelli: Cruelty Well Used”. Wondrium Daily: Web.
McCormick, John P. 2012. “Subdue the Senate: Machiavelli’s “Way of Freedom” or Path to Tyranny?” Political Theory 40, no. 6: 714-735.
Mokhber, Helia. 2018. “Machiavelli and the Virtue of Cruelty”. McGill Journal of Political Studies: Web.
Rodgers, Zachary. 2021. “Machiavelli’s Restrained Violence”. VoegelinView: Web.
Rojek, Chris. 2014. “Niccolo Machiavelli, Cultural Intermediaries and the Category of Achieved Celebrity.” Celebrity Studies 5, no. 4 (2014): 455-468.