Assignment 3: Position Essay - Instructions Web Page

Exploring Machiavelli’s Virtù: The Relationship Between Power and Force in Leadership Student’s Name Institution of Affiliation Course Instructor Name Date Exploring Machiavelli’s Virtù: The Relationship Between Power and Force in Leadership The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli is one of the most controversial works in political philosophy. They contain polemical insights into leadership, power, and the realistic employment of coercion that have provoked debates for centuries. The best known and cryptic notion in Machiavelli’s political theory is virtù which embodies the right character that a leader should possess in order to gain and sustain power. Unlike the conventional leadership literature, Machiavelli’s viewpoint is more practical and therefore in his viewpoint, the objectives make the means, with a primary aim of preserving power. The well-known position of Machiavelli in The Prince, where he argues that a ruler has to be prepared to use force to gain and maintain power only partly reflected this approach: on the one hand, Machiavelli is right that this is one of the available opportunities for control which equally can be successful and experience failures, on the other hand, force is dangerous and can become a source of misfortune for a ruler only if it is His view of muscle and clout is consistent with his political realism. Machiavelli’s opinions and plans concerning the force will be considered in this essay, as well as his view on this matter in connection with virtù, with reference to the conceptions of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. Lasting, the essay will conclude that force can be an effective way to sustain power, though it must be used alongside with such ethical standards as are going to help to maintain the force in the future. Compare and Contrast Machiavelli’s Opinion on Force and Power. Among the practical concepts of Machiavelli, the principle of virtù is most important. In this context, therefore, virtù for Machiavelli does not refer to the conventional moral values of what will be termed ethical leadership, as virtù pertains to the abilities, guile, determination, and planning skills that leading figures require for them to remain in charge and direct their societies in ever uncertain political environments. Machiavelli stressed the point that to consolidate power, a prince has to be able to resort to violence when in power. It concerns not how the ruler provides for the effective use of power to become stable and not to succumb to the path of downfall. Machiavelli’s opinion of force must be discussed together with his concept of human nature. He wants people to be greedy and also claimed that the individuals behave for their self-gains only if there is no authority who learns them a lesson. Said this, Machiavelli is not an idealist, not an abstract thinker, but a thoroughly pragmatic author. In his theorization, he regards the application of force as necessary in with regard to political stability and the attainment of political goals. Superior force, in his mind is not evil in itself, because force is not absolute evil; it is a force, and anything that results from the application of force is defined by its outcome. Certainly one of the best examples of force as a method of maintaining power described by Machiavelli in The Prince is Cesare Borgia. It is worth stressing that much like modern dictators Borgia utilized force, diplomacy, and power struggle to consolidate and sustain his rule in Italy. The manner in which he is able to advance power and control through exterminating competitors shows us how Machiavelli postures force as a sound approach to rule (Machiavelli, 2008). But, as always, Machiavelli is realistic enough not to emphasize brute force, although force is all right provided that it is used in a proper manner. Where a ruler is so reputed to be merciless or unfair, he/she is likely to incite people and cause rebellion which takes away his/her power. Machiavelli of course speaks about a ruler who is to be feared but not hated. Magnanimity and force, in other words, should always be in some sort of parity: this is the theme of Book I of the Conquest of Mexico, Hearn’s documentary on Hernán Cortés. A prince who is hated but not feared will not rise to power over the population as a despotic ruler might seek, but a ruler who is both feared and hated will lead to rebellion (Machiavelli, 2008). Hence why force is one of the most used tools in political transactions that is not a one shot solution: used with prudence forces must be used wisely so as not to create resentment in the population to avoid the backlash that any amount of cruelty is guaranteed to provoke. Secondly, Machiavelli responds to the use of force. Although this might effectively stabilize a ruler’s rule for a while and obtain their means of state, there is higher likelihood it will not suffice if overused. Machiavelli distinguished between power acquired by force...