“A ruler, and particularly a ruler who is new to power, cannot conform to all those rules that men who are thought good are expected to respect, for he is often obliged, in order to hold on to power, to break his word, to be uncharitable, inhumane, and irreligious. So he must be mentally prepared to act as circumstances and changes in fortune require. As I have said, he should do what is right if he can; but he must be prepared to do wrong if necessary.” (pg. 55)

I chose this passage from Chapter 18 because as I was reading it, even before doing this specific assignment, I couldn’t help but nod and think to myself, “wow this is just how politics are today”. In fact, this statement is so relevant, that if a politician wanted to adhere to this advice today, Machiavelli’s advice would not need any ‘updating’. Nowadays,  many politicians put up a ruse, be it as candidates for president or some lower-tier political positions.  In order to be elevated to a seat of power, the candidate must show certain traits, as Machiavelli lists earlier: compassion, sympathy, trustworthiness, honesty, and must appeal to the people. However, genuinely possessing these traits could be a sign of weakness, as sometimes, a person in power must make a decision that could be considered uncharitable or inhumane.

According to Machiavelli’s advice, a leader has to pretend to be lovable, almost to the extent of a pushover, but be firm in his resolve. This is very sound advice although troublesome, because nowadays, in politics, many candidates for positions of power do just that- come off as lovable people with good intentions, but once they get the power they desire, they no longer care that much to appeal to the people, and instead make decisions that are criticized left and right, sometimes being necessary for the general good of the public, and at other times, completely uncalled for.

The passage that stuck out to me was “you must know then that there are two methods of fighting, the one by law, the other by force…”. My interpretation of this passage aligns with what U.S. politics is about. As we move towards the future, laws become outdated and inapplicable to the times. When in the leadership role of a diplomat, a king, or a President, it is difficult to sway your officials in your favor. People are often afraid of change and what they have grown accustomed too, but sticking to the norm can sometimes stunt the growth of evolution. Machiavelli said in this short passage that a prince needs to be cunning in both arts of surviving. They should notice danger and to stop those from defying him. I believe this excerpt aligns with modern day politics. Modern day representatives of this country may choose the deceitful, evil, or cunning route as opposed to a more honest and peaceful solution. Machiavelli suggest being evil, but not being perceived as evil will translate into being viewed as a successful ruler. Instead of that, a true leader can work towards peaceful actions with non-violent activity within the communities to prove a point and work towards a successful rule.

I picked chapter 18 instead of other recommended chapters because I am able to connect the context to our politics. In this chapter, Machiavelli explained how a prince should rule and maintain his state. He mentioned that a good leader should have all quality personalities. However, it is nearly impossible for one possesses all these virtues in the real world. Hence, a prince should at least present such virtues to other people and make them believe he really have such high moral standard. This is pretty much can apply to every politician in U.S. I think political leaders nowadays are so much harder to keep high moral standard than the old time. The major different is technology. People can easily receive information and news through social network. The distance between politicians and normal people now is much closer than Machiavelli’s time. It makes politicians become more difficult to hold their “high moral standard” public image because their life is more exposed to the public.

I think president Obama is doing a great job to project good public image. He is undoubtedly a master of public speech. Almost every news about his personal life is about the first family. He doesn’t have much negative news about personality and virtue. Such image gain him a large group of people to trust and support him.

I chose this “chapter” because it is true, to a certain extent. Contemporary leaders act like men and animals. It’s an intrinsic attribution of human beings to be evil. No one always play by the rule; therefore, it is normal for a leader to break the rule when necessary. So we can agree that it is natural, albeit inconspicuous, for a leader to have vices as well as virtues. But the catch here is this: the difference between successful leaders and incompetent leaders comes down to their ability or “survival instinct” to switch modes—animal to man and vice versa—when the situation reckons it advantageous to do so. Thus the leader who knows when it is best to be good and when it is necessary to be bad will persevere.

Although I am uninterested and unaware of U.S political polemics, I do know that our leaders act like men, which mean honest, reverend, ethical, generous, and gracious, to the public, but are animals, meaning nefarious, belligerent, and deceiving in private. And such behavior is understandable as long as the leader’s agenda aligns with the publics’ needs and has been fulfilled. Other concerns such as the methodologies are not important because the general people make judgments based on the outcome.

In the past year, it has been headlined that many U.S manufacturers are coming back. Perhaps this news is false. As Machiavelli pointed out, “men judge more by sight than by touch.” Politicians tells the public that jobs are coming back; therefore, people believe them and make judgments. But is it true? Does it feel like manufacturers are coming back from oversea? As far as I can see and feel, the garment industry and even the auto industry haven’t changed.

Overall, I believe Machiavelli’s teachings are relevant in contemporary politics because his advice focuses on the behavioral and psychological aspects of humans. As the future becomes history, people’s living conditions may improve, political systems become more abstract, but the idiosyncratic nature of human beings will not change. People will always be evil, selfish, and greedy no matter how much they evolve. In particular, he focuses on strength, prudence and fortune, and these three indicators of success do not change even after hundreds of years.

After reading this chapter, images of many world leaders rushed through my mind. How true it is that a leader must only pretend to have the qualities that is expected of them. And not actually have them. In modern slang we call this fronting. It’s like playing poker, your opponents don’t know what cards you have, but you can fool them and deceive them to believe you have the highest cards. In modern day politics, this applies to world leaders as well. The citizens need to be reassured that their leader has these qualities. So the leader then, with the help of the mass media, projects that he has these qualities. And lets the peoples imagination do the rest. Meaning, according to Machiavelli, people can be so simple-minded and be preoccupied with their immediate concerns, that you’ll find that they’re easily deceived.

For example, the Iraqi war, our president at the time had the peoples support for the war. But only after did we realize how wrong we were. This can be, because, we were not immediately affected by it. And our president and his cabinet deceived us into believing that war was necessary. Many soldiers who lost their lives and others who suffer the after effects of war. All this is the outcome of war. But people tend not to think about it, until they actually witness it with their own eyes. Like Machiavelli says, only the few who have the direct experience feel the immediate consequence.

So our former president successfully drove us into a war that may have been avoided. But since he was able to deceive the people and thus gain their support, he was able to do it. Now we have to clean up the mess that he left us.

Hopefully we learn from our mistakes and are more skeptical when a leader tries to drive our country into war. Like our contemporary president. Who, as a result, does get a lot of criticism for trying to not bring our country to another war. It seems that we may have not in fact learned our lesson.

So you must be a fox when it comes suspecting a trap, and a lion when it comes to making the wolves turn tail. Those who simply act like a lion all the time do not understand their business.

Even though this book was written more than 500 years ago it is still relevant and very useful to leaders who want to have success and stay in power for long time. In my opinion, this passage has a very important meaning that could be very useful for a candidate that plans to run for US president. I believe that The Prince is still very relevant because human nature has not changed and never will. There will always be good and bad people.

One of the biggest and costly issues that America has faced in last few decades has been foreign policy strategy. America’s foreign policy today covers a wide range of functions and issues. As a superpower, the United States has also taken a leadership role in peacemaking around the globe by trying to negotiate treaties and agreements to end regional conflicts. However, just by analyzing some of the wars that America has been part of, makes me wonder if they were all necessary and if they could have been avoided by trying to make smarter decisions on the long term.

Our politics in the US is currently in hyper mode. All those wars have really hurt the American economy, and this passage has a solution, which needs to be used in the right way. When a country is threatened leaders must show that they have the strength of a lion and must act as such. On the contrary, when dealing with economical or other problematic issues, a leader must act like a fox and make the smartest decisions for his/her country. Today America is facing many issues concerning foreign policy, such as global terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and relationships with some close allies. America needs a leader that has both the skills of a lion and of a fox.

Chapter 18 of The Prince, “How Princes Should Keep Their Word” is very relevant and could indeed help those wishing to enter US politics. To me, the most prolific statements made in this section is, “A prince […] must understand that he is unable to respect all those qualities for which men are considered good.” When I heard this quote, I thought of the classic James Stewart movie, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”. In it, Stewart’s character has an optimistic view on American politics, and holds dearly all the qualities of a good man, compassion, honesty and the rest. His character represents any new politician entering Washington for the first time; he thinks that he will be able to maintain and express all the good qualities he followed before entering politics. However, this quote reminds us that we are human (in Machiavelli’s opinion, we are all bad) and thus prone to be unjust at some point. Not only should a politician accept this as truth, but so should us non-government people. Having an improbable expectation of oneself will inhibit you from progress. You must, as a political leader at least, look at the future and understand that “the ends justify the means”.

But Machiavelli is not one to approve of only unjust deeds, as he says a prince “needs a flexible mind, altering as the winds of Fortune and changes in affairs require.” He is not calling for leaders to be completely immoral, he asks leaders be immoral when necessary. If a politician needs to pass a bill to maintain his position of power, he might have to make some backdoor deals, without informing the public, or, he might have to condemn people viscously to eliminate opposition.

However, out of most of these traits that Machiavelli says are okay to violate, the one he mentions never to violate is piety. “Nothing is more necessary than seeming to have [piety].” This I see on TV and hear in the papers every day. Politicians, especially in the US, constantly refer to God in their speeches, whether it is “parsing God” or “God bless America” God constantly pops up on the words of politicians.   If you make your faith questionable, as did Obama when rumors spread that he was Muslim, the common people, political peers, and media reporters will rail you. It seems that people fear that if a leader doesn’t believe in a higher being, then the leader will have no restrains to act amoral. The irony in this is that all that a politician must do then is drop the word God a few times and praise him, and the public the respect and trust him. Thus, US politicians should without a doubt show some form of faith, preferably Christian.

Chapter 19:

“You will become hateful, above all, as I have said, if you prey on the possessions and the women of your subjects. You should leave both alone…Make every effort to ensure your actions suggest greatness and endurance, strength of character and of purpose…acquire a reputation that will discourage people from even considering tricking or deceiving you” (Page 56).

First off, I especially liked this passage because it’s one of the few pieces of advice that doesn’t seem to be “Machiavellian” within this story. He is actually encouraging de Medici to be a good person and especially a good leader that the people will respect. Machiavelli warns him that when focusing on materialistic items and women, it brings in nothing but chaos to the throne, and it will make him look weak, and people will take advantage of such a king. And this is actually very insightful advice. We all know about the scandal with Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. When drama like this occurs, it makes the public furious and President Clinton lost a lot of credibility after the world had heard about this affair.

This advice to be a good leader by possessing a strong sense of character is an invaluable piece of advice for someone running for office in the US today. The people of America want someone who has a strong sense of who they are, what they want to achieve out of their presidency, and a person like that typically has a strong sense of character and possesses plenty of confidence. Essentially, Machiavelli is warning De Medici to be confident, be powerful but don’t use that power to be greedy with your possessions and to be unfaithful to your family and your people.

This advice is timeless, and applied to life back then just as much as it does now. I don’t believe that this advice needs to be altered to make sense to the people of today’s society. I feel as though Machiavelli perfectly captures the key to winning the hearts of the people, and this advice that all leaders should take.

The Tale of King Yunan and the Sage Duban

This story was told from the old fisherman to the genie, the purpose of this story is to give the genie a lesson that we should appreciate a person who helps you. The fisherman is warning the genie that: if you still try to kill me after I release you from the jar, you might end up like the king who bites his hand that feeds him. Scheherazade here is teaching the king that it is unfair to punish someone who had not wronged him. The sage represents the women being killed by the king. The lesson is being taught as the king was killed by sage’s poisons because of his distrust.

The Tale of the Husband and the Parrot

The story was told from King Yunan to his vizier, to remind him that tragedy happens when we distrust someone and could not control our anger. We usually see truth when it is too late. Scheherazade is teaching the king a lesson that we need to calm down and control our anger, and sometimes things are not always what they appear: not all women are cunning and disloyal. The story is being taught with the ending that the husband feel regretful of killing the parrot.

The Tale of the King and the She-Ghoul

In this story, a sub story told is about the king and the Sage. In this story, the Sage is favored by the King. Others who envy the Sage told the King that the Sage is a spy. They convinced the King that the Sage is planning on killing him. The King then decided to put the Sage to his death. The Sage however warned the King that if he were to destroy him, he too would be Destroyed. The King killed the Sage and soon after, he got poisoned and died also.

The lesson being taught here is that Karma is real. If you help someone else, you will be helped. If you hurt someone else, you will also be hurt.

This lesson is being taught by the Kings death. He killed the Sage and he too was killed.

The tale of the Husband and the Parrot

In this story, a man had a beautiful wife who encourages him to not travel without her. He however had to make a journey without her once and bought a very smart parrot. He left the Parrot at home went on his journey. When the man returned, he asked the Parrot what happened in his absence and the Parrot recited everything day by day. The man was told that his wife had an affair with her lover. He beat his wife to punish her. His wife got upset then set up the parrot to believe it was Dark and raining. When the man asked the parrot again what occurred during the night, the Parrot said it was raining and the Man believed the Parrot was crazy. He killed the parrot believing that if the Parrot was wrong about this night, it could’ve been wrong about his wife cheating on him. He then found out that the Parrot was in fact correct about his wife cheating on him.

The lesson being taught here is that one should not always jump to conclusions. The man jumped to the conclusion that his wife cheated on him based on what the parrot told him. By doing so, he beat his wife. Then he jumped to the conclusion that the Parrot was insane, and by doing so he killed the parrot. Only to find out the parrot was correct and didn’t deserve to be killed.

The lesion is being taught by the grief the man feels after he kills the parrot. He took an innocent life for no reason. Only because he jumped to conclusions.