Page 86 - DPOL201_WESTERN_POLITICAL_THOUGHT_ENGLISH

Western Political Thought

Notes foe wounded, for there would be a sure retaliation, and causing sufficient injury so that they
would hurt less and last for a short time. Machiavelli also advised the prince to imitate great
figures from the past, and cited the examples of Alexander the Great, Achilles, Caesar, and Scipio
Cyrus. He repeatedly referred to Moses, Cyrus, Romulus and Thesus as princes who attained their
positions through their own arms and ability, and so worthy of imitation.

Role of the Lawgiver
Machiavelli attached great importance to the role of the lawgiver, in the conviction that laws
contributed to civic virtues, ensuring the health of the body politic. A lawgiver was needed to
reform a corrupt society, establish a successful state and shape the national character of a people
by giving them suitable laws and government. Machiavelli described the lawgiver as an architect
not only of the state, but also of society, with its economic and religious institutions, and moral
norms, for the lawgiver could tear down old states, establish new ones, change governments and
laws, and transform people’s natures and qualities. The lawgiver had to satisfy the ambition of the
elite and that of the lower classes while restraining both at the same time, channelize the intellectual
power of the few and the physical power of the many into the service of the power and glory of
the state, from which both derived enjoyment. Though the lawgiver was omnipotent, Machiavelli
did not develop “a general theory of political absolutism as Hobbes did later”.
Unlike Rousseau, who assumed essential goodness in human beings and that it was society which
corrupted them, Machiavelli saw human nature as basically evil and wicked and hence instructed
the lawgiver to take cognizance of this fact. The lawgiver would have to balance the ambition of
one class and group with that of the other in order to establish a society of lasting good. Rousseau’s
lawgiver, on the other hand, created the conditions for individuals to realize their true potential
and become truly human and intelligent.
Nature of the State

Machiavelli’s state was a secular entity, with no relation to the church. It was morally isolated,
with no obligation to anything outside itself. It was independent and all its relations were accidental.
A state was necessary, for it existed to fulfil the desire for security of person and property.
Machiavelli defined the state as an organized force for the maintenance and security of possessions.
A state had to try and argument territory and power for itself. It either expanded or perished. It
had to look upon its neighbours as actual or potential enemies.
A well-ordered and stable state could be successful if it had a strong government at the centre, an
integrated public authority recognized by all, and a citizen army. Machiavelli saw good laws,
religion and a citizen army as the support structures for a stable and strong state. There could be
no good laws without good arms, and if there were good arms, good laws inevitably followed. An
army should consist of its own citizens between the ages of 17 and 40, physically well-trained in
arms and military skills, and psychologically prepared to fight a battle if necessary. A citizen who
was unwilling to defend his state lacked civic virtu. It was the duty of a ruler to create and
maintain an efficient, well-disciplined, well-equipped and loyal citizen army. A state with a citizen
army would be able to ward off potential threats from its neighbours and other ambitious states,
and also defend itself against civil strife and internal dissensions. Machiavelli repeatedly stressed
the fact that a state had to be in a position to fight for preserving its independence and liberty, and
for this a citizen army— and not mercenaries—was a basic requirement.
Machiavelli cautioned the ruler from using troops of other states, for they would not only exhaust
the treasury, but also invariably fail at crucial times. He also rejected the use of mercenaries, after
seeing Vitelli and his men fail the Florentines in 1499 while trying to capture Pisa as an outlet to
the sea for trading purposes. Mercenaries owed no loyalty and would switch their allegiance on a
larger offer of money. Moreover, unlike a citizen army, mercenaries did not fight for a cause on
behalf of a state.

80 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY