Who was Machiavelli's primary audience when the book was writen?Whos his audience today,would he be surprised?

Question

HELP!!!
What can be gained from this book (the prince) in today's world? What would a state be like under a Machiavellian ruler today?

thx sooo much!!!!!!!

Answer 1

Machiavelli's audience for "The Prince" was the Medici family that ruled Florence, from whom he was trying to garner favor.

In any case, I'll let you figure the rest out yourself. Sure sounds like a homework assignment to me!

Answer 2

Machiavelli wrote The Prince for princes of Italian City-states of his own era. Despite the fact that his most famous phrase is 'it is better to be feared than loved,' living in a monarchy ruled according to Machiavelli's advice wouldn't be all that bad. Fear in the original language could as easily be translated as respect, because the sense of it was different in those time, in the same way that the Bible often talks about the fear of God. Fear in the modern sense is very different. A Machiavellian prince would be amoral, certainly, at least in terms of his motivations; the reason being that Lorenzo di Medici, who was far too close to Machiavelli to be safely insulted, was about as amoral as it is possible to be without becoming a psychopath. Machiavelli make pragmatic arguments in The Prince, and makes no religious or moral arguments, because they would've fallen on deaf ears. His other works aren't nearly as pragmatic in tone or style.

A Machiavellian prince would arm his own populace, be outwardly very religious, honest and upright, and would be a great warrior and statesman. The fact that he was doing all these things for pragmatic rather than moral reasons would not have much effect on the day-to-day lives of his people. If you want a good example today, look at Singapore.

One of the reasons Communism has failed so miserably is because Communists refused to be pragmatic at every turn. They traded old-fashioned religion for a new version that was even more mystical and apocalyptic than any that had gone before, despite their professed atheism. An atheist could make an excellent ruler if he followed Machiavelli's guide, and though he would be something of a hypocrite, what difference does it make if you don't believe in God anyway.

H. Beam Piper's Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen is an excellent example of what an agnostic using Machiavelli's principles can accomplish. It's science fiction, but it gives you a good idea of what those principles look like when actually applied.

The relevance of Machiavelli's work today is that there are countless people who proclaim their disgust and hatred for all traditional beliefs, whether religious or otherwise, and then go running after psychics or mystics or other charlatans in their search for something to believe in. If you refuse to believe in any religion, pragmatism is a good alternative to the goofy beliefs that have become so popular today.

Of course you don't want to take it too far. Hannibal Lector is basically a pure pragmatist as well as a psychopath. Brrr.