Assignment help

Politics Essay 代写 他的话语中

Politics Essay 代写 他的话语中

而在王子和他的话语,Machiavellis建议多点不同,他保持了一致性的理想,我相信于他面对使他如此悬殊的书面意见的情况。

王子是马基雅维利最受欢迎的作品,通常被称为作为一个指南的君主制国家,无论是自然的或强加的,达到“结束,每个人都在他面前,即,荣耀和财富”。(王子二十五)他的话语Livy另一方面是罗马帝国和他的建议与他观察到在佛罗伦萨等周边城市对比检查。

需要解决最矛盾的思想是马基雅维利是否真正认可或君主国或共和国的统治。我相信,虽然似乎是矛盾的,它是相同的马基雅维利,他相信在两个同样但不是在同一时间。马基雅维利在信仰上的明显变化是有道理的,如果我们把它看作是一个连续的两个部分。王子的不道德是首先需要赎回意大利的自由,之后一提起贵族促进基础设施联合意大利共和国的转变可以。因此,王子不应该被阅读作为一个自己的目的的指导,但作为一个预览,马基雅维利希望建立的,他更详细的论述通过的话语。

对于马基雅维利,是道德的概念或有不同的规则的规则几乎没有关系。他是信用的“两端的手段”的话,正是这使得没有区别的结构,这些手段。

在王子和他的论述中有一件事是明确的。无论权力是归属于一个人还是许多人,马基雅维利的信念是,一个强大的国家与统治者,为公众服务,并谨慎使用暴力,在必要的立场。主要目标有,将永远是国家的生存,在这种情况下,将参考城市或国家,而不是权力的地位,因为经常思考。

原因是发现当马基雅维利暴露自己在王子最后一个狂热的民族主义者;他无法忍受意大利被外国统治和他写的王子来指导“显赫的房子“美第奇家族的权力(王子第二十六)。他再次重申他在论述民族主义的信仰时,他明确提出国家的自由在“公平或不公平的考虑,人类或残忍,或光荣或耻辱,应该被允许为准。但把所有其他考虑放在一边,唯一的问题应该是,什么课程将拯救国家的生命和自由?”(本书3篇,XLI)

在写作的时候,意大利是散落在教皇们为了保护自己和他们的继承人只感兴趣,和其他欧洲国家如法国和西班牙入侵的威胁是悬在头顶上的。马基雅维利希望意大利成为自由但公认的少了点什么,从佛罗伦萨的领导人不见。皮耶罗家族是个胆小鬼,不敢对抗法国,Savonarola呼吁基督徒美德缺乏力量让他在办公室。因此,当马基雅维利作为一个外交官,他开发了他的悲观的世界观,如何一个统治者应该采取行动,以保护他的国家,在权力,地位和领土方面的改善,作为一个直接的一步。

Politics Essay 代写 他的话语中

While Machiavellis recommendations in The Prince and his Discourses differ on many points, he maintains a consistency of ideals that I believe were applied in the circumstances he faced which led him to this disparity of written opinion.

The Prince is Machiavelli’s most popular work and is often referred to as a guidebook for monarchies, either natural or imposed, to attain “the end which every man has before him, namely, glory and riches”. (Prince XXV) His Discourses on Livy on the other hand are an examination of the Roman Empire and his recommendations by drawing parallels with all he observed in Florence and other neighboring cities.

The most contradictory idea that needs addressing is whether Machiavelli truly endorses either principalities or the rule of a republic. I believe that though there seems to be contradiction, it is the same Machiavelli, and he believes in both equally but not at the same time. Machiavelli’s apparent change in belief makes sense if we see it as two parts of a continuum. The immorality of The Prince is first needed to redeem the liberty of Italy, after which an instituted infrastructure of nobles to facilitate transition of a united Italy to a republic can take place. Thus The Prince ought not to be read as a guide with its own ends but as a preview to what Machiavelli hoped to establish which he explored in greater detail through the Discourses.

For Machiavelli, the concept of being moral or there being differing systems of rule hardly matter. He is credit with the words “the ends justify the means” and it is precisely that which makes no distinction the structure these means take.

In both The Prince and his Discourses one thing is clear. Regardless whether power is vested in one man or many, Machiavelli’s belief that a strong state with rulers who serve the public good and exercise prudent use of violence where necessary stands. The main goal has and will always be for the survival of the state, which in this case would refer to the city or country and not to the position of power as often thought.

The reason is revealed when Machiavelli exposes himself as a fervent nationalist at the end of the Prince; he cannot stand Italy being under foreign rule and he wrote The Prince to guide the “illustrious house” of Medici to power (Prince XXVI). He again reiterates his nationalistic belief in the Discourses when he clearly puts the liberty of the country over “considerations of justice or injustice, humanity or cruelty, nor of glory or of shame, should be allowed to prevail. But putting all other considerations aside, the only question should be, what course will save the life and liberty of the country?” (Discourses book 3, XLI)

At the time of writing, Italy is scattered among the papal who were only interested in protecting themselves and their heirs, and the threat of invasion by other European powers like France and the Spanish were hanging overhead. Machiavelli wanted Italy to be free but recognized something was lacking, seen from the ineffectiveness of Florence’s leaders. Piero Medici was a coward and did not dare fight the French while Savonarola’s appeals on christian virtue lacked power to keep him in office. Thus when Machiavelli served as a diplomat he developed his pessimistic worldview on how a ruler should act to preserve his state, in terms of power, position and territory as an immediate step towards improvement.

 

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注