Reflection #4

During class this week, I have contradicted myself more times than I can count, but maybe this is due to the contradictions presented within Machiavelli's assumptions. My position constantly wavered due to the fantastic points made by my classmates on both sides of the issue. Initially being deadset on the idea that Machiavelli was correct, I went into the debate ready to defend Machiavelli's policies but not the skewed morals that they represented.  While in the discussion, my teammates brought the potential for bias within The Prince. Being written primarily as a job application, Machiavelli caters his policies to the Medici family and their interests. In doing so, Machiavelli is vulnerable to opposition. In my blog post for this week, I addressed some of this opposition regarding Machiavelli's position on generosity. While I still believe that Machiavelli did not account for the consequences of his policies, I now maintain that he is still relevant in today's world of politics. Yes, I know now that this statement completely contradicts that of my blog post and my comment. However, I believe that it is better to be able to redefine your idea of correctness in action and morality rather than remain stagnant. If I did not acknowledge some of the points my classmates made in our discussions today, I would be willfully ignorant.

Thinking should never be stagnant but dynamic and should always cast doubt on previously held assumptions. In realizing that some of my justifications could potentially be wrong, I was able to further my understanding of Machiavelli. Believing that I would look indecisive in front of my classmates, I honestly struggled with changing my opinion on Machiavelli and his ideas. Having said that now, I am back at my original statement, that Machiavelli is still relevant today and applies to modern-day political debates. Machiavelli's generality was purposeful in that it allowed The Prince to serve as a manual in discussions several centuries later. While mercenaries and fortresses may no longer exist in name, they have been replaced by modern-day facets such as private military contractors and protected borders. Monarchies of Machiavelli's era may no longer rule, but constitutional monarchies still serve as political figureheads and hold significant influence in conjunction with heads of state. Many of the arguments against the relevancy of Machiavelli in modern political affairs stem from the idea that Machiavelli only dealt with issues of the 14th century. Machiavelli could not have predicted how incredibly complicated world affairs would become in the centuries after his death. The 20th and 21st centuries alone have introduced new issues of sovereignty, immigration, and nationalism that our current politicians can not solve themselves. Institutions such as the European Union or NATO would have been impossible to predict during Machiavelli's time, yet they often operate under the guise of his ideas. The political framework of today is vastly different than that of Machiavelli's time, but still, uphold some of the essential parts of his work. Politicians always act in the fox-like manner that Machiavelli described and attempt keeping the populace in an ever-changing state of fear or love.