Replying to Avatar Rune Østgård

Do you know Niccolo Machiavelli?

You've probably heard about his book "The Prince."

But you likely didn't read it.

Because you were discusted by the idea of him writing a manual for tyrants, am I not correct?

That's at least why I didn't read it.

Today I learned that there is "strong evidence" indicating that Niccolo wrote it to get his old job back.

Well, that makes exactly zero sense to me.

When the Medicis reclaimed their power in 1512 he had been a long-time civil servant of the City of Florence.

The Medicis suspected him of conspiracy, imprisoned and tortured him, before they sent him into exile.

In Il Principe he wrote a value-free description of how a wise prince rules his people.

It was based on first-hand observations of the rulers of Florence and other states as well as on indepth inspection of historical accounts.

IMO the book puts at full display the way rulers treat us underlings, for everyone to see.

Niccolo initially dedicated the book to Giuliano de' Medici, Lorenzo's uncle.

After Giuliano's death in 1516, he rededicated it to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici.

He supposedly wrote "The Prince" as a "token of devotion" to the Medici family.

Niccolo made efforts to have the Medici family see and read "The Prince," but there's no clear evidence that they did so during his lifetime.

If he did this to receive employment at the House of Medicis he must have been a complete moron.

But his writings don't indicate that he was.

Far from it.

If the Medicis did read Il Principe they probably hated him even more than they had done before.

Because publishing it could have been a disaster for them.

The book first became available five years after Niccolo passed away.

I gave AI two tasks today, to tell me about his teaching of using 1) deception and 2) religion as political instruments.

Below you can read the answers.

After you have read them you may ask yourself if Machiavelli's recipes makes sense when you try to wrap your head around today's politics in your beloved representative democracies.

Enjoy!

1) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should deceive his people.

AI says:

Machiavelli argues that a ruler should be willing to deceive his people when necessary to maintain power and achieve his goals.

He believes it is better for a prince to be feared than loved, as fear is more reliable.

Machiavelli advises rulers to cultivate an appearance of virtue and morality, while being prepared to act against those virtues when required.

He states that "people are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that anyone who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived".

According to Machiavelli, rulers should use deception strategically to:

• Maintain their authority and power

• Manipulate public perception

• Outmaneuver rivals and enemies

• Achieve political objectives

However, he cautions that a ruler must be careful not to be hated, as this could lead to rebellion.

The key is to use deception judiciously while maintaining an outward appearance of virtue and strength

2) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should use religion in his politics.

AI says:

Machiavelli viewed religion primarily as a practical tool for rulers to maintain power and control over their subjects.

Here's a brief summary of his key points:

• Religion as a unifying force: Machiavelli believed religion could be used to unite people and garner support for the ruler.

• Maintaining stability: Religious traditions provide a sense of predictability and control, helping to keep society stable.

• Controlling the populace: By respecting and protecting religious practices, rulers can instill fear of disobedience and promise rewards in the afterlife for compliance.

• Appearance of piety: Machiavelli advised rulers to appear religious and virtuous outwardly, even if they weren't genuinely devout.

• Legitimizing authority: Religion could be used to make a ruler's actions seem divinely sanctioned, even if they were harsh or unjust.

• Spectacle and ritual: Religious ceremonies and displays could be used to reinforce the ruler's power and intimidate potential dissenters.

• Instilling virtues: Machiavelli saw religion as a means to cultivate desirable qualities in citizens.

In essence, Machiavelli advocated for a pragmatic approach to religion in politics, viewing it as a powerful tool for maintaining authority rather than a moral imperative.

If you want to join my quest for answers, feel free to hit the like, share and follow buttons.

Its a good book. I'm curious what the AI says about the book's reception in courts and by Christians specifically.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

If you ask for instance Perplexity.ai - which I used - pls share it with us.

Using that AI, so far the most illuminating version of the question was this :

"Was "the prince" banned? Why?"

Answer:

Yes, "The Prince" by Niccolò Machiavelli was banned shortly after its publication. The main reasons for the ban include:

Threat to Catholic authority: The book was considered a direct challenge to Roman Catholic authority, as Machiavelli proposed that a prince should prioritize his own interests over church doctrine.

Conflict with Christian ethics: Machiavelli's advice often contradicted traditional Christian moral teachings, advocating for pragmatism over virtue.

Placement on the Index: In 1559, "The Prince" and all of Machiavelli's books were placed on the Catholic Church's "Index of Prohibited Books".

Perceived promotion of deception: The book suggested that politicians need not be truly moral, but only appear to be good and moral to the public.

Disregard for Christian morality: Machiavelli emphasized historical patterns and materialist views over divine intervention, which was problematic for religious authorities.

Fear of losing power: The Catholic Church, already challenged by the Protestant Reformation, feared losing more power and authority to other religious groups.

The ban was an attempt by the Church to preserve its doctrine and authority, as well as to suppress ideas that could potentially undermine its position in society and politics.

When I asked about courts, it gave a vague none answer

Not really a surprise - Catholic church gonna Catholic church.

💯

Venice gave this:

The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli has been banned and challenged numerous times throughout history. The reasons for these bans often center around the book's perceived immorality, promotion of deceitfulness, and its apparent encouragement of tyranny.

In 1532, The Prince was placed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (List of Forbidden Books) by the Roman Catholic Church, which deemed it heretical due to its criticism of secular and religious authority. This ban lasted until 1890.

Other reasons for banning or challenging The Prince include:

1. Fear of inspiring revolution: During times of political unrest, The Prince has been banned for allegedly promoting ideas that could inspire revolutionary activities.

2. Concerns about morality: Critics argue that the book promotes immoral behavior and justifies tyranny under the guise of pragmatism.

3. Anti-Machiavellian sentiment: Some people have objected to Machiavelli's ideas due to their perceived amorality or realism, leading to calls for censorship.

Despite these bans and challenges, The Prince remains a widely studied and influential work in political theory and history.

Great, thx for sharing!

thank you!

learned something new today, had never heard of this.

Me too 🙏

Brilliant 😁

I guess the Medicis asked the church to ban it

I also asked it to contrast The Prince with St. Augustine's views, and that was interesting. Could be a foreshadow of the communism vs capitalism saga - Augustine writes about virtue and divine providence and Machiavelli writes about power and random fortune.

Luv it..AI is a fascinating tool

No wonder why our political class fears it

Yeah. Well, politics is mostly about gate-keeping

Yup, that's important