Rhetoric Quiz - November 5, 2007

Prompt:

"The Prince is a concise statement of Machiavell's belief that classical and Christian political theory is unworkable in a world that defines politics as the exercise of power and the struggle for power. It is also implicitly a rejection of a nihilistic counterethic, that only power and brute force matter."

Discuss to what extent you agree or disagree with this statement. What evidence can you bring to support your position?

(Dante Germino, Machiavelli to Marx: Modern Western Political Thought, p. 32)

By classical Christian political theory, I would assume that Professor Germino means modes of governing controlled by a Christian ethic and worldview, which I think he would consider a kind, peaceful, and generous state. Under this definition, he says Machiavelli thinks a Christian prince would be ill-suited to actually rule a country and I would agree with him. Machiavelli’s work is not merely one of conjecture. In most situations, what he says is true and he supports it with many historical examples.

Now, on the grounds of Machiavelli stating these “Christians” do not possess a workable politic, I believe Germino is mistaken in his interpretation of what a Christian princedom would look like. It is certainly true that some Christian prince would probably try to create a country similar to the one aforementioned, but I would assert that a real Christian prince would not have these problems. The fact that one is a Christian does not make him an incompetent ruler; one can easily act in some, and I emphasize some, of the forms Machiavelli describes. Obviously a Christian or any somewhat moral person would not use criminal actions to become a prince and would not advocate cruelty as a method of peacekeeping to name a few examples.

In furthering the argument against Germino’s assertion that Machiavelli’s politic shows a Christian political theory is not practical, one may consider a few examples. Take generosity as discussed in Chapter XVI. Machiavelli says that the generous prince will soon be hated by his subjects for the taxes and other things he levies upon them (The Prince, 41-42). For a Christian to act in this manner would not only be unwise from a political standpoint, but also from a Christian perspective. One is to be frugal with one’s money and to not waste anything. Another example of this is war from Chapter 14, most people would expect a Christian to be opposed to war, and rightfully so, but simply because one is opposed to war does not mean he cannot fight well and use war as the tool it is. A Christian can be an effective student of warfare and lead his nation to victory on many occasions without taking pleasure in them.

There is however, an area in which Germino does have a point. In Chapter XVIII, Machiavelli addresses virtue by saying, “It is not essential, then, that a Prince should have all the good qualities mentioned above…, but it is most essential that he should seem to have them; I will even venture to affirm that if he has an invariably practices them all, they are hurtful, whereas the appearance of having them is useful.” (The Prince, 46) This statement is contradictory to Christianity in that he says it is hurtful to possess these virtues, but I believe it can be reconciled through the application of those virtues. If a prince is kind, compassionate and generous to his subjects, he can harm his rule, but it is possible to practice these virtues with wisdom and not ruin your princedom.

The latter of the two statements that Germino makes is relatively obvious in Machiavelli’s The Prince. Throughout the entire book, he does advocate character and wisdom in a prince as well as power and force. One specific example of this is generosity as I referenced previously. A prince must know how to balance his incomes and his expenditures while keeping his subjects content. While Machiavelli shows that one can wield force as an effective tool, he does not advocate it as the exclusive way to control an area. In Chapter VIII, Machiavelli addresses the issue of a criminal prince, but he simply presents it as an effective way to control a princedom, not as a proper or correct way. Machiavelli recognizes that crimes and cruelty are evil (The Prince, 23) but that they are also effective. On the other hand, Machiavelli is very emphatic in Chapter IX that one must secure the friendship of the people and in Chapter XVIII, he emphasizes the necessity that the people perceive you as virtuous. These things are not force oriented, yet Machiavelli places a good deal of stress upon these and other non-force related aspects throughout The Prince.

With that said, I would not lift up The Prince as an ideal handbook for a Christian prince to follow. It does not state in any substantial way that Christians cannot be good princes, but it does promote concepts which a Christian could not use. Machiavelli presents multiple strategies for maintaining a strong princedom and he does outline which are more effective than others, but he does not seem to believe that there is only one way to have a strong state and I cannot therefore say that he disallows any possibility of a Christian princedom succeeding.