In class this week, we started talking about virtuous leaders vs. leaders who are more aggressive in protecting the state. This topic is definitely a topic that stands out as we scrutinize Machiavelli's opinions about how a prince should act. I think that there are definitely more issues that stem from our debate. More specifically, I am interested in addressing Machiavelli's ideas about prowess as it relates to the acquisition of principalities. As I read this particular section in the book, I definitely generated many thoughts about whether or not I can agree or disagree with his bold statements which were expressed on pages 19 through 22 in my book.
One of the things that Machiavelli elaborates about is how excellent leaders follow in the same path as the leaders who stood before them. "Men nearly always follow the tracks made by others and proceed in their affairs by imitation, even though they cannot entirely keep to the tracks made by others or emulate the prowess of their models." (19) Honestly, I cannot entirely agree with what he says here. It leads me to think about great leaders of today and the people that we idolize. Even though we strive to imitate these people, ultimately each individual has a separate role and an individual path. Anyone is capable of showing prowess. However, people can do so in different ways. Thus, I don't think that it is necessary to follow in the same direction as previous leaders to meet positive ends and accomplish significant goals. When a leader shows his distinct personality and marches in his own direction, in my opinion, he is more memorable.
Additionally, Machiavelli elaborates about how men who possess prowess have a difficult time acquiring principalities, but are somehow able to sustain them with fewer challenges. His thoughts on about this were insightful and led me to think more intensely about them. For example, the opposition that the prince faces when he alters the structure of the state is an interesting issue to ponder about. I support his ideas about how an individual must be an innovator in order to get support from the people who originally opposed him when he came to power. Outstanding leaders cannot always succumb to the thoughts and beliefs of the majority in times of adversity. They have to forge their own way and make aggressive decisions. When the results of these decisions are positive and lead to success, people get a real chance to see how powerful he actually is. In real life, people can see examples of this when they witness the struggles that other individuals face and how they manage to overcome them. Personally, when I see friends and family members endure tough times and reach a positive end, I tend to think about how my opinions about them is elevated. I also tend to evaluate how they handled it, even if I would have chosen to handle it in the same way. Thus, Machiavelli's words about prowess and the ability to handle the negative aspects of ruling an empire seem reasonable to me.
I tended to focus on my own personal thoughts and things that stood out in my mind. However, I think that there are definitely deeper ideas could be considered in regards to my views and Machiavelli's views of prowess. For example, how much or to what extent does a person need to exert it? Is it something that is innate within leaders or is it something that they appear to have? When does it have adverse effects or become a negative aspect? These are things that commenters can may choose to address.
Alexandria Cornwall
No comments:
Post a Comment