Use Machiavelli to argue against The Beatitudes

Machiavelli is a practical man who sees things in a way that will get the quickest results. He tells of some violent actions that must be taken in order for a Prince to get what he wants. “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy” is not something a prince would do (line 5). A prince is more interested in gaining land and power to be merciful. If the people are not strong enough than they will be left behind or killed. A prince would not worry about killing anyone. In fact, some princes order the killings of many people just to gain power of a city or region. “Blessed are those persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” does not fit for a prince (line 8). If a person is not alive, then they are no help at all. A prince needs followers to fight and do his bidding. If they are persecuted, then people must not like them and will bring down a prince. The last thing a prince needs is a meek person. Meek people are easily pushed around and taken advantage of. A prince is a headstrong individual who is willing to do most things in order to gain the advantage and defeat his enemy. Overall, a person who follows the beatitudes during the time of Machiavelli will soon find himself living a very hard life if he is not yet dead. These people would be seen as too soft and readily taken over.

Use The Beatitudes to argue against Machiavelli

The beatitudes and Machiavelli are quite contradictory to one another. In the Beatitudes it is more peaceful and caring. They are essentially telling everyone that if they follow the way of God they will be given everything in order to reach salvation. However, the Prince goes about things differently. He is more forceful and harsh. The Prince goes out of his way to get things that he needs even if they are not very nice. ^“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” tells how people who are religious and want God in their lives shall receive him (line 4). Religion is not a main part of being a Prince. The Prince is more worried about gaining more land and power. “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” explains how the good and law abiding people will see God (line 6). The Prince and his followers will do whatever it takes to gain the upper hand and more power. They will set ambushes, execute people, and kill anyone who gets in their way. This is not always the best approach when trying to gain more followers. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God”, tells how those who preach peace will be able to be God’s son” (line 7). Many religious people want to go to a better place after they die. In order for this to happen, most religions say that the people must be nice and peaceful to everyone else. However, in the Prince, there was not much peace. It was all about fighting and gaining the upper hand by killing all of the enemies. The Beatitudes are much more caring and respectful than what Machiavelli tells of how a Prince should act.

Which of the following would be most successful in business today? And what kind of business would they run (Internet startup, chain store, internatio

Remirro da Orca was a “resolute and ruthless man (Machiavelli 34). He was given complete authority over Romagna and “ within the shortest time brought peace and unity to Romagna, gaining much power and influence in the process” (Machiavelli 34). However, it had come to Cesare Borgia’s attention that Remirro da Orca had caused “hatred among the people” (Machiavelli 34) and so ordered his execution in the town square. This man would have made a great leader of an chain store. He was excellent at uniting and putting everyone in their place, but caused too much hatred and so was ordered killed. Since he is not a main character but an important one, he would be able to run a Wal-Mart or another chain store.

Cesare Borgia was considered a great man. He worked himself up from the bottom and rose to the top. He would be an excellent CEO of a huge multibillion dollar corporation, maybe like Bill Gates. He “used every means in his power and did all that a prudent and skillful man must do in order to establish himself in those states which the arms and good fortune of another have granted him” (Machiavelli 31). Cesare Borgia was not afraid to exercise his power and do what needed to be done. In order to be the greatest, Borgia won over the nobleman of the Orsini and Colonna by “granting them large stipends”(Machiavelli 33). Now all of the affection for the noblemen transferred to Borgia which made him very powerful. Not only was Borgia a good leader but also a good deceiver. He did not trust his own allies, so he had to dispose of them, yet kept the followers as his allies. With every move he made, Cesare Borgia made himself more powerful and played his game like a CEO executive would do to make even more money.

Oliverotto da Fermo is a great example of a man who started out low and worked his way up to someone very powerful. He would make a great leader for a mafia. Oliverotto da Fermo started out as a soldier working for his uncle and then later his brother. As like all mafia members he grew ambitious so he worked with Vitelli and fought against Pisa and Naples. He finally started to work for Borgia and wanted Fermo for himself so he decided to kill his uncle and prominent people of Fermo in an ambush. Oliverotto da Fermo then made himself the ruler. He successfully worked his way up from a thug to a boss if he was in a mafia.

When is Generosity a Good Thing?

A Prince needs to be thought of as generous. This will make the people love him and respect him. However, Machiavelli says that “Generosity pursued in a way that makes people perceive you as generous will harm you, because if you exercise generosity in all modesty, as is appropriate, it will not be recognized, and you will not be able to avoid the reputation of miserliness” (Machiavelli 74). However, to be generous a prince would have to consume all of his resources to maintain the appearance of being generous, but this would mean that he would overburden the populace with taxes and lose the favor of the people causing hatred (Machiavelli 74). This is a situation that cannot be won. In this situation a prince would need to pick the lesser of the two evils, which in this case is miserliness. If a prince is considered miserly then the people will have disdain for him. However, a reputation for being generous “brings with it a reputation for rapacity, incurring disdain with hatred” (Machiavelli 76). If the people hate the prince, they will move against him. But if the people have only disdain for the prince, they will still follow him but will only be slightly angry with him.

Machiavelli proves that being generous is not always a good thing. Because with generosity comes destruction. If the prince is not generous, the people will still follow him but will not replace him.

The Prince's Greatest Ally

According to Niccolo Machiavelli in The Prince there is only one thing that is a prince’s greatest ally: the people. He who has the loyalty or respect of the people will be able to keep his position longer than those who do not have it (Machiavelli 45). A prince cannot avoid the people because there are so many of them but he can avoid the nobles because there are so few. This means that in order to stay in power, he would have to listen to the people and satisfy them before satisfying anyone of greater importance (Machiavelli 46). A prince would also need to show courage, dignity, power, and greatness (Machiavelli 86). This would ensure that the people will believe in him and be ready to fight for his cause. As long as the masses are in favor of the prince, the conspirators will be too afraid to denounce the prince (Machiavelli 87). If it is impossible to win over the people, then he would need to strive to avoid the hatred of the more powerful faction (Machiavelli 90). As long as the prince does not take away the land of his subjects and their women, then he should be able to win the citizens. They are more likely to forgive if their father was killed, but less likely if their land or woman was taken from them. An army of a prince’s own people is much stronger than any other army. Mercenaries fight halfheartedly because they are only in it for the money. An auxiliary army is commanded by some other powerful person and this army would likely to turn on the prince the moment they saw victory (Machiavelli 57). Both of these armies have no reason to fight like the subjects of their prince.

The strongest prince is that which commands his subjects’ loyalty or in the least, their desire to fight for him. For without his people, a prince has no position of power. The masses of people can easily bring about the ruin of their prince. Because of this there are extremely important and are the prince’s greatest ally.

(Reposted) Was Henry VIII justified in divorcing Catherine and making himself head of the Church of England?

The powerful King Henry VIII was ruler of the nation of England during the years of 1509 and 1547. He was a strong man who had desires to see England strong. In order to do this though, he needed to have a son which would be his successor. He married Catherine of Aragon who was of Spanish royalty (Hapsburg). She was a devote catholic as was mostly everyone else in Spain. Catherine and Henry VIII tried many times to have a son. But as history would have it, they were unable to produce a male successor. Because of this dilemma, King Henry VIII had an idea that if he could divorce Catherine, then he would be able to marry another women and have a son with her. In order to do this though he needed permission from the Pope in the Holy Roman Empire (Letter). Since Henry VIII was Catholic at the time, he was not justified in divorcing Catherine and then marrying another women. However, because of his advisers King Henry VIII justified in making himself the head of the Church in English. Henry VIII was not justified in divorcing Catherine because of his religion, he only wanted to marry again for a chance to have a son, and in order to make himself head of the Church of England.

King Henry VIII was Catholic and so was his wife, Catherine of Aragon. Because of their religion they were not able to get a divorce because it was non catholic. However, they could get an annulment which is the was the Church says they did not recognize the marriage in the first place. But in order to get an annulment, they had to get permission from the Pope. At the time the Pope was under house arrest by the Holy Roman Emperor who was Charles V (Hapsburg). Charles V happened to be the nephew of Catherine of Aragon. Because of his position of having the Pope under house arrest, the Pope would not agree to Charles V or Charles would not even want Henry VIII and Catherine to get an annulment (Hapsburg). Either way, Henry VIII did not receive an annulment which means his divorce was not recognized and not justified.

Not only did Henry marry but he did it six more times. He is also thought to have ordered the deaths of at least two of his wives (Contemporary). This pushed Henry VIII even further from the Catholic church and the Vatican in Italy. His main desire was to get a male heir, and because of this he went to such great lengths to marry a women who would be able to have a son. Henry VIII wanted to get rid of Catherine of Aragon because it was said that he who marries his brother's wife was "blighted in Gods eyes"(Contemporary). This means that he would never be able to have a son with Catherine. Not only was it with Catherine, but Henry VIII could not father a son from any of his other wives. In the end with so many wives and deaths, Henry VIII was and could not be justified with divorcing his first wife, Catherine of Aragon.

On the other hand, Henry VIII was able to justifiably make himself the head of the Church in England. Through the Act of Supremacy was he able to pass laws making himself head of the church. Because he took the legal route, he was able legally make himself the head of the church. It went through parliament, and because of Henry VIII's advisers, made it seem as if the people and other political figures were having a say in the matter of Henry VIII becoming head of the Church (The Act of Supremacy). Henry VIII made it seem like it was the will of the people that he would become head of the Church. Because of his conniving schemes Henry was able to land himself in the position of one of the most powerful monarchs in the world (The Act in Restraint of Appeals).

King Henry VIII of England was a very intelligent man. He knew that if he wanted to keep the Tudor line, he would need a male heir. But his first wife could not give him what he needed, so he decided to have her divorced. This was not legal because he was of the Catholic Church. Henry VIII wanted and pleaded for an annulment but was not granted one and took matters into his own hands. He divorced Catherine of Aragon which was not justified and made himself the head of the Church in England which was justified through legal means. Overall, Henry's actions seemed right to him, and if things had been different, the future would not be the same.



Works Cited

"The Act of Supremacy." Then Again. . . Web. 04 Oct. 2010. .

"Habsburg History - European Monarch Genealogy." Welcome - European Monarch Genealogy. Web. 04 Oct. 2010. .

"The Act in Restraint of Appeals." History Learning Site. Web. 04 Oct. 2010. .

"Medieval Sourcebook: Letter of Thomas Cranmer, 1533." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 03 Oct. 2010. .

"Primary Sources: A Contemporary Description of Henry VIII, 1515." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 04 Oct. 2010. .