JOHN P.

MCCORMICK, Machiavellian Democracy: Controlling Elites with Ferocious Populism

Machiavelli is notorious for advising how to manipulate the people. (p. 297)
But the evidence suggests that he considered his most important and most original piece of advice to be something quite
different: how to control elites. (p.298)

LEO STRAUSS, Machiavelli’s Intention: The Prince

In the Epistle Dedicatory Machiavelli gives three indications of the subject matter of the book: he has
incorporated into it his knowledge of the actions of great men both modern and ancient; he dares to discuss
princely government and to give rules for it; he possesses knowledge of the nature of princes.

MARY G. DIETZ, Trapping the Prince: Machiavelli and the Politics of Deception
… they tend to acknowledge Machiavelli as the champion of realism, and The Prince, in particular, as the
first treatise in political thought to infuse the contemplation of political affairs with a spirit of empiricism,
realpolitik and raison d’état. (p. 777)
Accordingly, in many areas of political inquiry Machiavelli has come to be regarded as the theorist of
“Machiavellianism,” and Machiavellianism itself entails understanding politics primarily in terms of who
dominates whom and how successfully. (p. 778)
No political thinker was more aware of how crafty assault by deceit could serve as a substitute for brute
assault by violence than Niccolò Machiavelli. The theme of deception weaves through all of his work—his
drama, his military, his writings, his history, his political theory. (p. 778)
Machiavelli recognizes the advantages of crafty assault in any form, be it trickery, stratagem, or artifice.

FRANCIS MICHAEL C. ABAD, The Crowning of Thorns: of princes, lions, and foxes: An
analysis on the diminution of the efficacy of Machiavellianism in the Philippines
Perhaps among the multitude of Political Thinkers who contributed to the building of Western Thought,
none can come as close in infamy than Niccolò Machiavelli. (p. 1)

EBENSTEIN, W., & EBENSTEIN, A. In Great Political Thinkers: Plato to the Present In the study of
politics, the New Learning finds its clearest expression in Niccolò Machiavelli. (6th Edition ed., p. 284).

GARRET MATTINGLY, Machiavelli’s Prince: Political Science or Political Satire?

. . . Machiavelli’s advice book is nothing more than a joke, a “diabolical burlesque” of the mirror-of-princes
literature prevalent in Renaissance.

MARY G. DIETZ, Trapping the Prince: Machiavelli and the Politics of Deception
As a text, The Prince succeeded in securing Machiavelli’s future fame and in sealing his notoriety. As a
trap, it secured nothing. From all we know, Lorenzo never even read it. . . . How could Machiavelli’s
stratagem have come to naught. (p. 796)

ROBERTO RIDOLFI, The life of Niccolò Machiavelli

The Prince remained unread and Machiavelli unsummoned, forced to return to the countryside, where he
divided his days between the “ancient courts” and his favorite and altogether appropriate past time—snaring
thrushes with his bare hands. (p.140)

EDMOND BARINCOU, Machiavelli

Upon leaving the Medici palace, Machiavelli was said to mutter that “though he was not a man to plot
against princes, his little book would avenge him.” (p.78)

J.G.A. POCOCK, The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican
Tradition.(Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1975),
. . . in the history of secular political self-conscioussness, the “Machiavellian moment” is one which denotes
the time when man attempts to “maintain stability in a stream of irrational events conceived as essentially
destructive of all systems and security. (p. viii)
ISAIAH AZARIAH, The Political Ideas of Machiavelli: A Fresh Look
The obligations of love, he writes, are weak in comparison to the force of fear. Fear never fails, while love
may. This seemingly realistic, certainly cynical, analysis then suggests securing power through a primarily
reliance on fear. . . . The necessity of avoiding hatred threatens the autonomous power of the prince which
Machiavelli so eagerly desires. (p. 121)

HERBERT BUTTERFIELD, The Statecraft of Machiavelli

“ a textbook of usurpers” (p. 92)

LEO STRAUSS, Thoughts on Machiavelli

According to Machiavelli man must be seen as Beast Man rather than God Man (p. 296)

JOSEPH BIEN, Politics of the Present: Machiavellian Humanism

Machiavelli has often been described as at least a precursor of humanism inasmuch as he accurately describe
the political structure of reality on which humanism might be built and eliminated the ethical in his attempt
to found the state on a permanent basis. (p. 197)

FRANCIS MICHAEL C. ABAD, The Crowning of Thorns: of princes, lions, and foxes: An
analysis on the diminution of the efficacy of Machiavellianism in the Philippines
Machiavelli envisions the ideal ruler as someone who knows how to be good and bad, and an act can only be
good if it contributes to the accumulation of power, regardless of its intrinsic evil. For him, poisoning an ally
may be considered malevolent. But if it is a political enemy who is made to gulp it, that should be regarded
as something good, because by doing so the prince acquires more power from the loss of an opposition. He
must know how to appear virtuous, and show to the public the examples of perfect virtue. But behind all the
façade, he must prepare for war. To his people he appears as a man, compassionate, pious, and generous. To
his enemies, he bears the terror of the lion and the slyness of the fox. (p. 3)

WILLIAM WITTELS, Good Arms and Good Laws: Machiavelli, Regime-Type, and Violent Oppression
For him, violent oppression of one’s fellow citizens is the summum malum of politics. (p. 2)
According to Machiavelli, a prince – the analogue of an autocrat – can try to rule alone, over and against the
people, but to do so would be to cripple his power. Instead, a prince should solicit popular participation,
particularly via the citizen-militia, in order to partner with the people in marginalizing the greatest sources of
violent oppression, the prince’s fellow political elites and rival states seeking conquest. Of course, Machiavelli
still endorses the prince’s use of force and fraud, but he endorses these shocking practices for the purposes of
intervening against rampant violent oppression in his territory.

YVES WINTER, Plebian Politics: Machiavelli and the Ciompi Uprising Political Theory 40, no. 6 (2012): 737.
The first is what Yves Winter has called the “democratic turn” in the secondary literature. It celebrates
Machiavelli as one who sees the ends of the people as the touchstone for politics and one who regards the
people as a tremendous source of political power. (p. 737)

LOUIS ALTHUSSER, Machiavelli and Us, (New York: Verso, 1999); ANTONIO GRAMSCI, Selections
from the PrisonNotebooks (New York: International Publishers, 1972), 123-205
Marxist interpreters such as Antonio Gramsci and Louis Althusser see Machiavelli as an analyst of hegemony
in general and hegemony in Italy specifically.

VICKIE SULLIVAN, Machiavelli’s Three Romes: Religion, Human Liberty, and Politics Reformed.
(DeKalb, Ill: Northern Illinois University Press. 1996), 11.
Vickie Sullivan, for example, argues that Machiavelli launches an attack on both pagan and Christian Rome
in order to develop a politics in which “human beings are to be liberated from fear of the gods, but not from
human beings, for human beings are to assume the role of punisher that had been consigned to divine beings.”

LEO STRAUSS, Thoughts on Machiavelli, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), 9.

For Leo Strauss, Machiavelli’s separation of statecraft and soulcraft is an artifact of Machiavelli’s placing
Commented [p1]: Bien, Joseph. "Politics of the Present:
love of one’s country over love of one’s soul and opens the way for him to be a “teacher of evil.” Machiavellian Humanism." Philosophy and
Phenomenological Research 42, no. 2 (1981): 197-204.
doi:10.2307/2107291
ARISTOTLE, The Nichomachean Ethics, trans. J. A. K. Thomson (New York, NY: Penguin, 1976), Book
IV, Chapter 3
Politics, on such a view, is a life and death contest in which winners earn survival and even acclaim, but can
never be Aristotle’s “Great Souled Man” and can forget about entering the kingdom of heaven.

STEVEN FORDE, “International Realism and the Science of Politics: Thucydides, Machiavelli, and
Neorealism,” International Studies Quarterly 39, no. 2 (June 1995): 158.
In this vein, Steven Forde claims “Machissavelli insists that realist logic inevitably points in the direction of
universal imperialism and the repudiation of all ethical restraints.”

BIRELEY, R. Machiavelli Turned Upside down: Giovanni Botaro 'sRegione de Stato (1589) American
Political Science Association http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p211307_index.html,pp. 202-209, retrieved
on 24.10.2010.
His works are sometimes even said to have contributed to the modem negative connotations of the words
"politics" and "politician", and within a few generations, "Old Nick" became an English term for the devil and
the adjective Machiavellian became a pejorative term describing someone who aims to deceive and manipulate
others for personal advantage. "Machiavellianism" also remains a popular term used in speeches and
journalism; while in psychology, it denotes a personality type.

CROCE, BENEDETTO. My Philosophy (1949). http://www.amazon.eom/gp/reader/l, p. 142, retrieved on

20-10-2010.
A more moderate school of thought, associated with the name of Benedetto Croce, views Machiavelli as
simply a "realist" or a "pragmatist” advocating the suspension of commonplace ethics in matters of politics*

SKINNER, QUENTIN. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought,

http://www.questia.com/read/22093813?title=Machiavelli, 1978,pp. 37- 42, retrieved on 24-05-2010.
Thus, Machiavelli lays claim to the mantle of the founder of "modem" political science, in contrast with
Aristotle's classical norm-laden vision of a political science of virtue. Perhaps the mildest version of the amoral
ruler's commission of acts deemed vicious by convention is a "last best" option.

STECKO, JUSTYNA, (A)Moral Machiavellianism – Analysis of the Niccolo Machiavelli Concept

Any moral evaluation of political activities bothers on absurdity. The winners are always right as the end
justifies the means. (p.153)
The sovereign task of the State is to maintain and defend its autonomy and might, even at the cost of actions
that do not correlate reality. (P. 154)
Cruelty is only to be applied to strengthen authority. (p. 155)
What is, therefore, Machiavellianism? It is a set of political and social activities that relies on severity and
shrewdness, the efficiency of activities that dwell on the slogan “the end justifies the means”.
Machiavellianism, as a political doctrine holds that virtue and efficient politics must be geared, primarily, to
achieve set objectives. (P. 157)
If a ruler can cheat based on his political ideals, does that mean he can kill as well? Machiavelli agrees with this and
does not only defends lies but also political assassinations. . . . It is difficult to distinguish virtue from evil as they are
both intermingling elements, while the world represents their binding component. (p. 157)

“whatever happens in this world has its parallel in recent past. All things are achieved by people, who were
guided and continue to be guided by the same passions, and their actions should therefore yield the same
results”. Hence, “in order to predict the future, it is necessary to know the past”

RIKLIN, CYTZA, Riklin, Die Führungslehre von Niccolò Machiavelli, Bern 1996, s. 29.
the world is like a round of game in which both honest players and scammers participate. The Prince that
wishes to participate in the round, attempting to avoid falling prey of the fraud, must understand how to cheat,
not necessarily for him to apply such knowledge, but to avoid being cheated