UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

2.1. Niccolo Machiavelli

Introduction
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469 - 1527) was an Italian philosopher, political
theorist, diplomat, musician and writer of the Renaissance period. He was a central figure in
the political scene of the Italian Renaissance, a tumultuous period of plots, wars between city
states and constantly shifting alliances.

Although he never considered himself a philosopher (and often overtly rejected philosophical
inquiry as irrelevant), many subsequent political philosophers have been influenced by his
ideas. His name has since passed into common usage to refer to any political move that is
devious or cunning in nature, although this probably represents a more extreme view than
Machiavelli actually took.

He is best known today for two main works, the well-known "The Prince" (a treatise on
political realism and a guide on how a ruler can retain control over his subjects), and the
"Discourses on Livy" (the most important work on republicanism in the early modern
period).

Although he is sometimes presented as a model of Moral Nihilism, that is actually highly

questionable as he was largely silent on moral matters and, if anything, he presented an
alternative to the ethical theories of his day, rather than an all-out rejection of all morality. He
was also accused of Atheism, again with little justification.

Life
Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy on 3 May 1469, the second son of Bernardo di
Niccolò Machiavelli (a lawyer) and Bartolommea di Stefano Nelli. His family was believed
to be descended from the old marquesses of Tuscany, and was probably quite wealthy.
Little is known of his early life, but his education (possibly at the University of Florence) left
him with a thorough knowledge of the Latin and Italian classics, and he was trained as a man
with great nobility and severe rigor by his father.

He entered governmental service in Florence as a clerk and ambassador in 1494, the same
year as Florence had restored the republic and expelled the ruling Medici family. He was
soon promoted to Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, with responsibility for
diplomatic negotiations and military matters.

Between 1499 and 1512, he undertook a number of diplomatic missions to the court of Louis
XII of France, Ferdinand II of Aragón and the Papacy in Rome. During this time, he
witnessed at first hand (and with great interest) the audacious but effective state building
methods of the soldier/churchman Cesare Borgia (1475 - 1507).

From 1503 to 1506, Machiavelli was responsible for the Florentine militia and the defense of
the city (he distrusted mercenaries, preferring a citizen militia). He had some early success,
but in 1512, the Medici (with the help of Pope Julius II and Spanish troops) defeated the
Florentine force, and Machiavelli was removed from office, accused of conspiracy and
arrested.

After torture, he was eventually released and retired to his estate at Sant'Andrea (in
Percussina near Florence) and began writing the treatises that would ensure his place in the

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 1

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

history of Political Philosophy, "Il Principe" ("The Prince") and "Discorsi sopra la prima
deca di Tito Livio" ("Discourses on Livy").

Near the end of his life, and probably with the aid of well-connected friends whom he had
been constantly badgering, Machiavelli began to return to the favor of the Medici family.
From 1520 to 1525, he worked on a "History of Florence", commissioned by Cardinal Giulio
de'Medici (who later became Pope Clement VII). However, before he could achieve a full
rehabilitation, he died in San Casciano, just outside of Florence, on 21 June 1527. His resting
place is unknown.

Works

Machiavelli's best known work, "Il Principe" ("The Prince"), was written in some haste in
1513 while in exile on his farm outside Florence, and was dedicated to Lorenzo de'Medici in
the hope of regaining his status in the Florentine Government. However, it was only formally
published posthumously in 1532. In it, he described the arts by which a Prince (or ruler)
could retain control of his realm. A "new" prince has a much more difficult task than a
hereditary prince, since he must stabilize his newfound power and build a structure that will
endure a task that requires the Prince to be publicly above reproach but privately may require
him to do immoral things in order to achieve his goals.

He outlined his criteria for acceptable cruel actions and pointed out the irony in the fact that
good can come from evil actions. Although "The Prince" did not dispense entirely with
morality nor advocate wholesale selfishness or degeneracy, the Catholic Church nevertheless
put the work on its index of prohibited books, and it was viewed very negatively by many
Humanists, such as Erasmus.

It marked a fundamental break between Realism and Idealism. Although never directly stated
in the book, "the end justifies the means" is often quoted as indicative of the Pragmatism or
Instrumentalism that underlies Machiavelli's philosophy.

He also touched on totalitarian themes, arguing that the state is merely an instrument for the
benefit of the ruler, who should have no qualms at using whatever means are at his disposal
to keep the citizenry suppressed. Unlike Plato and Aristotle, though, Machiavelli was not
looking to describe the ideal society, merely to present a guide to getting and preserving
power and the status quo.

His other major contribution to political thought, the "Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito
Livio" ("Discourses on Livy") was begun around 1516 and completed in 1518 or 1519. It was
an exposition of the principles of republican rule, masquerading as a commentary on the
work of the famous historian of the Roman Republic.

It constitutes a series of lessons on how a republic should be started and structured, including
the concept of checks and balances, the strength of a tripartite structure, and the superiority of
a republic over a principality or monarchy. If not the first, then it was certainly the most
important work on republicanism in the early modern period.

2.2. Machiavelli’s view of Human nature

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 2

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

Machiavelli was a political philosopher from Florence Italy. He lived during the Italian
Renaissance from May 1469 to 1527. This period in time that Machiavelli lived was the
"rebirth" of art in Italy and rediscovery of ancient philosophy, literature and science. His
philosophy about the nature of man is that man possesses both good and bad qualities, but
will lean towards his own self-interests when all things are equal and thus according to him,
man is a fickle (liable to sudden unpredictable change) creature.

He further maintains that “men are simple of mind, and so much dominated by their
immediate needs, that a deceitful man will always find plenty who are ready to be deceived;
thus a prince can appear to be merciful, truthful, humane, sincere, and religious. The
advantage of this appearance will be the impression of a just government, even if the
government employs underlying unjust means to accomplish its goals. Men will look at the
end result to consider whether to praise or denounce him.

He believed that men will follow a powerful ruler, and without this power, effective rule
seems hard and difficult to accomplish. This argument seems logical because we can see in
our today’s world; we have punishments for those who commit crimes. As such, People
follow laws because they fear the punishment that comes with the violation of the existing
law. And, that some measure of cruelty is necessary to maintain order.

The repercussions (a remote or indirect consequence of some action) may not be as extreme
as it was back then, but the general idea still exists. This also ties in with another of
Machiavelli’s view, that people are aggressive and acquisitive in a state of constant strife and
anarchy. They are discontent and dissatisfied for their needs are unlimited. But fortune limits
their possessions and capacity for enjoyment.

Thus, according to Machiavelli, human beings are selfish, wicked and opportunists. They are
not social but anti-social animal for they always tries to promote their own self interest. They
are wicked because they are prepared to sacrifice the collective interests to promote their own
interests. In fact, love of novelty and change seems to be the basic nature of all men. They
love their property more than their kiths and kins.

As such, a person can more readily forgive the murder of his father than the confiscation of
his patrimony. They are by nature jealous and cannot see others prosper in life. And so, men
establish government with the strongest and the most courageous becomes the law giver and
leaders as they desire personal safety and security of possessions. Like Aristotle, he also
believed that the government will reshape the individual into just and fair being.

Thus, the nature of human beings is constant for history moved in a cyclical way, alternating
between growth and decay. This enabled an individual to discern the general laws of political
behavior with a view to maximize one’s gain. Simply because there seems to have no
difference between how an individual should live and how they ought to live, for one who
sacrifices what had to be done in favour of what ought to be done usually sowed the seeds of
destruction rather than preservation.

Furthermore, he also pointed out that human mind has a tendency to glorify the past, decry
the present and hope for a better future. Like Aristotle, he also characterized the individual as
a political animal. While Aristotle implied the innate sociability of the human beings, he
referred to the individual’s love for power, reputation, keenness to establish superiority over
others and the innate desire to control and dominate others.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 3

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

As such, he recognizes the importance of law and order in the lives of an individual provided
by a stable and lawful political community consisting of public-spirited and virtuous citizens.
Such an arrangement would then fulfill human needs of being admired, respected and
remembered.

According to Machiavelli a ruler who preserved the state without undermining or flouting
laws or inflicting harm to its people attains fame and respected in all fronts of human lives.
But on the contrary, the absence of civil virtue such as intelligence, know-how and logic
would then leads to moral degradation and corruption.

Machiavelli had discussed this in the beginning of ‘The Prince’ about the human nature.
Machiavelli had assumed and had given the human nature a dark picture to an extreme that
some think that he had considered humans to that of animals. According to Machiavelli
human nature is completely selfish and full of ego and that they always think about their own
self interest like the masses desire safety and security and the ruler wants power, and that
they are very selfish to gain and conquer their motives.

Machiavelli has described humans as bad, evil, selfish, egoistic and depraved. Human wants
has no particular limit, they are greedy, sensual creature, mean, bad and depraved and he
even goes on to saying that a human being only cares for himself, their family and their
property and to conquer this they are ready to do anything even to the extent of forgiving
their enemy, he even says that in order to safeguard their priorities they can even forgive the
murder of their father or any kin for that matter than the seizure of his property or any harm
to himself.

Humans love themselves first and then think about other things and that they are not law
abiding citizens. As long as the ruler is providing the m the safety and the security that they
desire that is the safety and security of them, their family and that of their property they are
sated and to also protect from any foreign invaders, and if the ruler is able to do this the
masses are easy to rule and the state is well governed.

According tom Machiavelli humans use the state and the government for their own selfish
reason, profit and protection, they immediately start disliking or hating the thing that they
can’t achieve or is difficult to achieve or is out of their reach and will deliberately tend to
avoid or delay it. Machiavelli also says that human by nature are wicked and aggressive, in
the words of Sabine, “Human nature is moreover, profoundly aggressive and acquisitive, men
aim to keep what they have and to acquire more. Neither in power nor in possessions is
always in fact limited by natural scarcity.

Accordingly men are always in a condition of strife and competition which threatens an open
anarchy unless checked by the ruthless forces of the state.” Machiavelli believes that human
beings are insatiable and mean by nature. Humans are insatiable but full of desires. His view
regarding human nature is that of a high resemblance to that of Hobbes. Machiavelli’s views
regarding politics, religion and morality are essentially based on his view of human nature.

Machiavelli says that, “Men are ungrateful, fickle, deceitful, cowardly and avaricious.” From
this it sums up to the conclusion that a ruler or a monarch should aim rather to be feared than
to be loved. Machiavelli says that a ruler should protect the people, their families and their
properties and he can rule over them without any hassle.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 4

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

Machiavelli quotes, “Men love at their pleasure, but fear at the pleasure of the prince, who
should therefore depend upon that which in his own, not upon that which is of others. Yet he
may be feared without being hated if he refrains from touching their property and their
woman kind of his subjects, and if he avoids bloodshed excepting when there is good cause
and manifest justification for it is in as much as men more easily forget the loss of their father
than of their property.”

With it he tends to say that man so much is in love with his priorities that he can go to any
extreme and even turn evil to protect it from danger, Machiavelli here also mentions that
apart from property men is also insecure of his women and that if anyone is eyeing their
women they tend to be aggressive and then it comes up to their ego, this idea or thought of
Machiavelli can be seen even today.

Machiavelli’s vie and point of human nature was very materialistic, he had rejected and
turned down the ideologies of the Greek philosophers Aristotle and Plato who said that the
state aims to make the people virtuous and good, he also dismisses the idea that existed in the
medieval ages that the end of the state is to smooth the way of a man to eternal salvation.
Machiavelli as always was highly criticized for this but according to him, “The end of the
state is material prosperity.”

Criticism of Machiavelli’s idea of Human Nature

Machiavelli’s concept of human nature is highly criticized by many till today, by various
people and on various grounds. Some of them are being:

Man by nature has some virtues and is not purely selfish. His concept of human nature does
not take into consideration the universal society. His views and ideas regarding human nature
are the pure result of the observations he made and the conditions that prevailed at that
particular time in Italy. According to the quote given by Sabine, “Machiavelli is not so much
concerned with badness or egoism as a general human motive and with its prevalence in Italy
as a symptom of social discordance.

To him, Italy stands as an example of corrupt society.” So here the criticism is that
Machiavelli has give the concept of human nature as at his time Italy’s political position was
unbalanced and he had observed and wrote according to that and that his concept might be
limited and not universal.

According to Machiavelli’s concept of human nature man is an animal who is bad and
depraved and that he cannot be reformed by any method. But he is here criticized with
accordance to Plato and Aristotle who has said that throughout with the means of proper
education man can be reformed.

Machiavelli’s saying that men is ready to sacrifice their kin or relations for the sake and
security of his priorities, but Machiavelli here also says that the top three priorities of man are
life, family and then property, so how can he give up one priority to meet the other. No doubt
that people love their property but they love and have equally deep regard and affection for
their family, kin’s and other relations of blood.

According to all this and keeping in mind the critics it can be said that on the basis of the
above give criticism and discussion Machiavelli cannot be said as completely right, to some

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 5

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

he might me, he and his ideas might be excellent to some but others may oppose it and it
might not be according to their liking and ideology.

But Machiavelli does not create an illusion he speaks and thinks practical and rational and
reflects reality and most of his views are prevalent and can be seen in the present or current
day scenario, as in today’s life we too observed and think that people have become selfish
and that they think mostly about themselves, a lot of examples can be given from our own
personal life and what we observe of that of others.

2.2. Machiavelli’s view on Statecraft

According to Machiavelli, State is the highest form of human association to which every
subject must completely surrender their allegiance. It came into existence to check the selfish
interests of the human beings and as such, it is an artificial creation of the men. It is
indispensable for the promotion of human welfare. It is to be worshipped even by sacrificing
the individual for the interest of the state. A ruler must remember that whatever brings
success is due to power.

As such, the success or failure of a state depends upon the prosperity of its people and thus, a
ruler for acquiring political power can use any type of means. He asserted that a Political
statesman plays important role in organizing state, and providing it with safety and security.
Hence the major theme of the “Prince” is the process of acquiring power. Modern power
politics cannot be taught without referring to Machiavelli’s book “The Prince”.

Besides, “The Discourses” and “The art of war” were Machiavelli’s famous work. It contains
analysis of body politics. “The Prince” is a handbook on the “Art of government” and “State
craft”. Hence it is said that, “The Prince” is not an academic work on political science but it is
a book on the art of governance. It is in the form of advice and addressed to a ruler.

Thus, Machiavelli favored monarchy rather than Aristocracy or Oligarchy. He suggested for a
strong and unscrupulous prince for Italy. He did not recommend the republican form of
government for Italy, as it presupposes virtuous, honest and patriotic citizens, whereas the
16th century Italians was corrupt and selfish.

Hence, Machiavelli suggested a strong and powerful ruler for Italy. The central theme of
Machiavelli’s political ideas is power. He highlighted power as an essential ingredient of
politics.

According to him moral code of individual prescribed by the church cannot provide
guidelines to the ruler. He said politics is a constant struggle for power. All politics is power
politics. As such, for Machiavelli absolute state was the End; and for this Means was power.

He said the sole aim of the “Prince” was to make the country strong and united, establish
peace and order and expel the foreign invader. To achieve this end any means would be fair
and just. Thus, some of the significant aspects of advice found in Machiavelli’s book the
“Prince” to the ruler can be elaborated as follows;

Machiavelli’s doctrine of Raison D ‟Etat‟: It means “Reason of state‟

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 6

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

It implies actions and policies promoting safety and security of the state. As the state must
preserve itself before it promotes the welfare of its people. For preserving and safeguarding it
all means adopted by the state are justified. According to him, in politics one is guided by the
harsh realities of political life which is a struggle for power and survival. The actions of the
state must be judged only on the basis of “Raison D „Etat” that is independent, self-sufficient
and well ordered and well maintain state. Machiavelli advised the prince in preserving and
safeguarding this type of state where all means adopted by the state are justified. Prince
should give priority to power. Morality and ethics have different spheres. It cannot be
mingled with the reason of the state. To a prince power of state is of supreme importance.
Self sufficiency of the state means the state will have its own army, a strong and unified
government, unity and integrity among the people and solid economic foundation.

End justifies the Means

It is a very famous statement of Machiavelli which he justified for the “Reason of state”. A
ruler must remember that whatever brings success and power is virtuous even cunningness
and shrewdness is justified. Politics is the most precarious game. It can never be played in a
decent and orderly manner. The state has some primary objectives and responsibilities like
protection of life, maintenance of law and order and looking after well-being of its members.
Hence, the state must have adequate means at its disposal.

State is sovereign, autonomous and non-religious

Machiavelli said that the state is superior to all associations in the human society. It is
sovereign and is autonomous, moral and religious considerations cannot bind the prince. He
is above and outside the morality. He can use religion to realize his ends. Religion cannot
influence politics and the church cannot control the state. In fact sovereign state enjoys
absolute power over all individuals and institutions. State is must necessary of all institutions.
It stands on a wholly different footing and therefore be judged by different standards. State
power is the end and religion is its organ and instrument. Nothing is un-earthy in the state, for
State came into being to satisfy material interests of the people. He divorced politics from
theology and government from religion. He did not view the state as having a moral end and
purpose but gave importance to man’s worldly life. He said politics is an independent activity
with its own principles and laws.

A prince must combine the qualities of a lion and a fox

Machiavelli advised that the prince should imitate the qualities of fox and lion. The imitation
of the fox (cunningness, foresight) will enable him to visualize his goal and means to achieve
it. The imitation of the lion will give him necessary strength and force to achieve that goal. A
fox might have shrewdness and foresight, but he is powerless without necessary force of a
lion. Similarly a lion without shrewdness and prudence of a fox would be reckless. Hence, a
ruler who wants to be very successful must combine in himself the qualities of both fox and
lion. He must possess bravery of lion and cunningness of fox, physical force is necessary
when there is anarchy and indiscipline. But law and morality is essential to check selfishness
of people and to generate civic virtues.

Use double standard of morality

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 7

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

Machiavelli uses two sets of politics, one for the ruler and another for his subjects. He said
that morality is not necessary for the ruler. He is creator of law and morality hence he is
above the both. A ruler has primary duty of preserving the state. For this purpose he may use
instruments of lie, conspiracy, killings and massacre because absolute morality is neither
possible nor desirable in politics. He insisted that morality is essential for people. Only moral
citizens willingly obey laws of the state and sacrifice their lives for their nation. It cultivates
civic sense and patriotic spirit. Thus, Machiavelli prescribes double standard of morality.

Favored despotic ruler

Machiavelli did not recommend the republican form of Government, because republican form
requires virtuous, honest and patriotic citizens. He also advised the prince not to convert his
monarchy into a republic. If his heirs are corrupt and misuse their power for evil purposes.
According to Machiavelli, foundation of Government is the reason of state Government
which is not created by God to punish men for their sin. He says that the government is
founded upon the weakness and insufficient capacity of men. If in a society men are corrupt
and selfish and the law is powerless, then normal administration is not possible at all. A
superior power is essential for bringing the society into order. The government with absolute
power will then stop the excessive desires and control our human behavior.

Maintaining a strong army

He recommended constant military preparedness for the preservation of the state. The Prince
should organize a strong army to meet any internal and external threat to his power. Strong
and regular army was must for a state for its own defense. The state tries to build up its own
independent, regular and faithful army. Such an army should consist of its own citizens and
be prepared not only to defend its national borders but also to expand. The citizens must be
trained for army service and there should be compulsory military training for all able persons.

Human nature is low and ungrateful, so prince must consider this nature of man

According to Machiavelli, rational analysis of politics must begin with an account of human
nature. He viewed the activities of man with special interest and explained human nature. He
asserts men to be a compound of weakness, ungrateful, fear, lust for power and assumed all
men are bad. Some of the prominent traits of human nature are;
There is no limit to human desires. He is selfish and aggressive. And hence, there is strife and
competition.

The masses are interested in security. They realize that only laws of the state can ensure
security and so they co-operate with the state and obey the laws. Thus, a ruler who wants to
be successful must ensure security of life and protection of its people. People must be
restrained by force because force breeds fear. Only force and repression can keep control and
check on the evil tendencies in man. Hence, the method of government should be force and
not persuasion.

By nature every human being is ambitious and remains unsatisfied. No human being is
content with his position. He is always after domination. The enmities and wars are the
outcome of this desire. Thus, human nature is selfish, power hungry, quarrelsome and guided
by materialistic considerations. Only fear of punishment is a powerful bond and it never fails.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 8

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

The Prince should try to win popularity of his people

According to Machiavelli, the Prince should try to win popularity, goodwill and affection of
his people. He should keep his subjects materially contented by not taxing them. The prince
should not interfere in age old customs and traditions of his people because by nature people
are conservative. He should not have craving for wealth and women of his own subjects. He
should keep a watchful eye on his dissidents.

A prince must have council of wise men and not of flatterers

A Powerful government and internal unity were essential for any state. The Prince must
choose wise men in his council and should give them full liberty to speak the truth to him. He
must ask them about everything and hear their opinion and afterwards deliberate by himself
in his own way.

Separate politics from religion

Before Machiavelli, medieval political philosophers believed that the religion was the basis
of the state. But Machiavelli emancipated the state completely from the control of the church.
He denied medieval philosophy of religion. He repudiates the theory of Aquinas that man
needs the guidance of the divine law. He said that only end which man can place before
himself is the pursuit of his well being in his material values of life. He did not view them as
having a moral end and purpose but gave importance to man’s worldly life. He believed that
politics is an independent activity with its own principles and laws. Moral and religion
considerations cannot bind the Prince as state is above and outside the religion.

He does not ignore religion and morality. In the opening chapter of his Discourses, he says
that the Princes who want to maintain themselves must respect all religion and preserve the
purity of it. He said religion is useful only as an organ of the state. He gave only an
instrumental value to religion. He advised the ruler that religion plays important role in the
life of a community.

According to him, religion is necessary for unity and integrity of the people within the state.
Common religion creates a sense of unity among people. Thus, religious rites and beliefs
establish social harmony in the society. It also cultivates a civic sense and patriotic spirit.
Decline of respect for religion among the people is a sign of ruin for the state. He said
religion cannot influence politics and the church cannot control the state. In fact the sovereign
state enjoys absolute power over all individuals and institutions. As such the church is
subordinate to the state.

Thus, Machiavelli separated religion from politics and paved way for the emergence of the
secular state. He was not against the religion and morality. He only proposes two different
standards of morality and placed the sate above morality and religion. According to him, state
is the highest form of social organization and the most necessary of all institutions. It stands
on a wholly different footing and must therefore be judged by different standards. He said
politics is an independent activity with its own principles and laws. State is non-religious and
secular. It has its own rules of conduct to follow. Thus, he sanctioned the use of immoral
means by the ruler whenever it was necessary to do so to save the state. The separation of
politics from ethics is the essence of Machiavellian.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 9

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

Prince must be free from emotions

According to Machiavelli, the Prince should exploit emotions of his people for the purpose of
the state. He should be passive, calculative and opportunist. His suggestion is that a prince
must know how to act as a beast.

Ordered state

In “The Prince” Machiavelli advocated absolutism and an effective government. This

advocacy of absolutism was due to the fact that he had witnessed anarchy, lawlessness,
corruption and misrule that prevailed in Italy of his times. He had witnessed how King
Charles VIII of France had captured Florence without being offered resistance. Therefore, he
advocated a well-organized, ordered and militarily strong state. Without a strong state, any
country had no hope of surviving in international politics. He believed that an ordered state
was the only security against forces of external aggression and internal chaos.

2.3. Machiavelli’s view on Religion and Politics

Machiavelli’s view on Religion

Before Machiavelli, almost all thinkers and political personalities believed and propagated
and promoted religion as the basis of the state. Plato considered state as the sole priority and
religion to be a moral and an integrated part of the state. Aristotle too believed that religion
was a factor and the basis for the proper administration of a good and excellent working state,
but Machiavelli as being different did too believed in religion but his idea and the use of
religion was totally and intelligently different, he made religion as the way as a basis for the
advancement and the betterment of the state.

Throughout the middle ages it was the church was the dominant and the supreme and the
major part of the state and the church had political power and ruled the state and the pope of
the church had supreme authority even in the sway of politics, as god was feared and the
church was the creation of the god so the popes or the father were given and was considered
as a dominant authority over the state of affairs to that of the state as that the soul has the
supreme authority over the body, it was during that time that it was assumes that the church
has a superior authority and position as compare, but Machiavelli was opposed to this idea as
he thought of it differently and with this and his intellectual thoughts he believed and
promoted religion but with his own twist of idea.

It was Machiavelli and his idea that there should be a separation of religion from politics; it
was Machiavelli who divorced religion from politics and segregated them completely from
one another like his separation of ethics and moral from politics. He believed that politics
attached to something is not real politics and that it should be played or governed on one on
one basis.

Machiavelli, he gave less importance to religion as compared to the state. The state according
to Machiavelli has no important relation to the church but it also has no relation to God or
any other super natural power for the matter of fact, he says that the state needs religion only
as an instrumental object for furthering its own object. According to Allen, “In Machiavelli’s
views the state can be understood only in terms of human lusts and appetites and that the
successful ruler must learn to control these forms.”

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 10

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

As he gave less importance to religion, he at the very same time stated and accepted that
morality has a limited place in the society and that they should and must be both exploited
and preserved. He thus was unmoral and not immoral.

Machiavelli thought that religious factor in the society is a driving force which a clever and
intellectual ruler can use to turn the table in the game of politics and use religion for their
own advantage and growth of the state. For him the ruler should be an intelligent to use
religion in such a way that the masses are happy and so that it is for the better administration
of the state.

For this he promoted religion but keeping his own interest and thought in mind. He was even
considered as a person who is against religion and one who does not believes and because of
this he was disliked and opposed many a times. But he always made his thinking and
perception of religion clear.

According to Machiavelli religion is a guiding principle which prevents you from doing or
committing anything wrong, religion makes a person righteous makes them fearful and more
law abiding, it is usually seen that a religious person is a god fearing person and because of
this fear he is more into religion, the more he is into religion the more he will go according to
the religious teachings and as all the religion teaches good to a person and that they should be
just and moral so the more he is morally developed and the more he is morally developed he
will think before doing anything wrong and it will lead to less wrong doings which also mean
less crimes and law breaking, the lesser the crime the administration would work smoothly
and which in turn hails and makes the state more powerful, so Machiavelli did believe in
religion but with a but he added his own sense of twist there for the betterment of the state.

He on one hand encouraged people to be more and more religious and on the other hand he
also set certain strategies for the ruler to assume and pretend to be merciful, god fearing,
righteous, religious and powerful but when it comes to the state the ruler can and should go to
any extremes for the sake and the security of the state even if he has to be or is considered to
be immoral.

Thus the ruler in order to rule should be highly pretentious and if he pretends to the masses
then they would be easy to rule conditioned that the ruler should protect their initial priorities
regarding safety and security of them their family and their property.

Machiavelli’s separation of religion is an outstanding idea and the way he uses religion for
the advancement of the society and the betterment of the administration is absolutely
commendable. His idea of the ruler as a pretender is so relevant event in today’s time, as
politicians and other influential personalities even though highly corrupted and evil from
within tend and try to make a clear and a white impression to and in front of the masses and
hoax them in order to increase their vote banks or to gain their benefit and profit.

So what Machiavelli had thought and perceived about this centuries ago is still very much
there and prevails in the present context. Thus Machiavelli thought about religion as a
powerful instrument so far that it is in the hands of the wise ruler to sustain and uphold the
national morale of the state.

Machiavelli’s view on Politics

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 11

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

Machiavelli acquired practical experience of politics of his time. He was born in Florence,
Italy in 1469 in a well-to-do family, when Prince Medici was at the height of his power. At
the age of 25, he entered the government service as a clerk chancery. And within a very short
period of time he was appointed as an ambassador and after that he became the secretary of
the king. Thus, he acquired practical experience of politics. His administrative and political
experience determined his views about politics. Machiavelli lived in Renaissance Italy and
was greatly influenced by the new spirit of Renaissance.

The intellectual awakening injected rational scientific approach in every sphere of human life
and replaced the faith by reason. Italy was the leader of Renaissance, the most modern and
urbanized country of Europe during that time. But in Italy the wealth, intellect and artistic
achievements were accompanied by moral degradation and political chaos. The worst aspect
of that period during which Machiavelli lived was the rampant corruption and selfishness
among the Italian rulers and the church officials. He represents the culture which was
undergoing a period of deep political crisis.

Italy consisted of a very large number of independent states. Some of these states like
Florence and Venice were republics, while others were ruled by despots. As such, internally
these states were the home of fierce political rivalries and personal ambition and externally
they were involved in a constant struggle with one another. This political division of Italy and
the struggle between the states made the country weak and a prey for the ambitions of the
powerful neighboring states of France, Prussia and Spain. France invaded Italy and defeated
the Medici rulers.

Machiavelli was an eye witness to this tragedy. It was out of this traumatic experience that
made him conclude that unless Italy was united under a strong central government, the
country would always remain under the threat of conquest and annexation by neighboring
countries. He was not interested in idealistic conception of the state. His chief interest was
concentrated in the unity of body politics and power. He adopted an empirical method. He
seriously studied the past from 4th to 15th century of the medieval age.

This age was characterized by the Feudal system of governance. In this system, the king
divided his dominions into many parts. Each part was granted to a noble or tenant chief.
There were no common laws and central authority. In short the feudal system was a confused
form of Government.

Out of this confusion, Church emerged as the superior authority which resulted in continuous
conflict between the spiritual and temporal authorities. As such, the Pope claimed superiority
over all the princes where state (civil authority) was merely the police department of the
church. Thus, a true national life could not grow in such a system. So he surveyed the entire
Italian society.

The feudalism and the church not only destroyed the identity and importance of the state, but
the state was considered sub-ordinate. But he completely divorced religion from politics. He
broke the medieval tradition that the political authority is under the control of church. He
made the state totally independent of the church by saying that the state has its own rules of
conduct to follow which is highest, supreme and autonomous. He further said that the state is
superior to all associations in the human society. He rejected the feudal system and
propounded all powerful central authority which is supreme over all institutions.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 12

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

Before him, Aristotle has already separated politics from philosophy and gave a separate
status to political science as a subject. But he completely divorced religion from politics and
tried to subordinate religion to the state.

He repudiated the theory of Aquinas that man needs the guidance of the divine law. He said
that only end which man can place before himself is the pursuit of his well-being in his life
that is material values. As such, state came into being to satisfy the material needs of the
individuals. He differentiated between public and private morality where Plato and Aristotle
believed in moral nature and ethical ends of the state but he completely disregarded this view
of the state.

According to him, there is vital difference between the ruler and the citizens. He insisted that
morality is essential for the people and not the ruler. Thus, he asserted “Let the Prince, then
look to the maintenance of the state; the means will always be deemed honorable and will
receive general approbations”. In other words, he attaches more importance to the reason of
state than the principles of morality.

Subsequently, only moral citizens willingly obey laws of the state and sacrifice their lives for
their nation. But morality is not necessary for the ruler. He is the creator of law and morality
and hence he is above the both.

A ruler has primary duty of preserving the state. He may use instruments of lie, conspiracy
and killings for the safety of the state. Thus, he asserted in his Discourses “when the safety of
our country is absolutely at stake there need be no questions of what is just or unjust, merciful
or cruel, praise-worthy or disgraceful but all other considerations set aside, that course alone
is to be taken which may save our country and maintain its liberty”.

Thus, according to him, absolute morality is neither possible nor desirable in politics. For
example, a corrupt state cannot be reformed without heavy dose of violence. For it is must
that a corrupt and degenerated people would need a shock therapy to revive it.

He actually does not ignore religion and morality but he wants to use the religion and church
as an instrument for creating national customs and habits of creating national thoughts which
will help the state in preserving peace and order and maintaining the stability of the society.

According to him, the Prince must preserve the purity of all religious observances and treat
them with proper reverence. Common religion creates a sense of unity among the people but
decline of respect for religion among the people is a sign of ruin for the state. As such, he
proposed two different standards of morality and placed the state above morality.

The first set of morality is judged by the success in keeping and increasing his power and the
second set is judged by the strength which his conduct imparts to the social groups. Thus, he
divorced politics from theology and Church from politics.

He gave the state a non-religious character. He did not view the state as having a moral end
and purpose but gave importance to man’s worldly life. And so, Prof. Maxey said, “in
Machiavelli’s eye the state knows no ethics.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 13

 UNIT– 2: MACHIAVELLI; HUMAN NATURE, STATE CRAFT, RELIGION AND POLITICS

What it does is neither ethical nor unethical but entirely non-ethical. It is of neuter gender so
far as right and wrong are concerned”. In the realm of statecraft and in the affairs of
government there is but one criterion by which to judge the character of an action and that is
by its result. If the results are good the action cannot be called wrong, nor is it necessarily
right; the safe thing to do is to call it expedient; and if the results are bad, to say the action
was inexpedient.

Conclusion

Machiavelli’s main achievement is his talking about an insoluble dilemma, putting a question
mark in the path of posterity. There is no doubt that he caused a lot of confusion and
exaggeration. He confused the very basic proposition that eventually ideals may be very
different proposition that the traditional conventional human ideals based on ideas of Natural
Law, human goodness, morality and brotherly love. This was never realized and it was taken
for granted that those who acted on the opposite of these ideals were considered to be not
right, at times dangerous ones.

Machiavellian principals are exploited on different other levels than what he had intended for
their universal truth. From political setup to business world, his theories of power have
transcended from these areas to the basic functions of the human beings’ struggle for power.
In the same way the modern governmental principalities understand these, so does the 20th
century corporate tycoon down to the struggling working class.

Clearly, acquisition of power is not the only goal for Machiavelli. His work is beyond that.
He professes ways to acquire and maintain power, be it immoral in the eyes of society but as
long as these actions are the need of the circumstances, they are justified. He talks of how
people should acquire virtue, liberty and also stressed on importance of public speeches. His
teachings might have been criticized so far as being evil but the fact is he was being bluntly
honest, to expose the bitter truth, to publicly endorse the view which has been in practice in
politics and business since ages; ends justify the means.

People tend to ignore these, but he brought the worst to everyone’s notice but that doesn’t
mean to be liberated from its consequences. It is one thing to accept things like these
happening in practice, another to try to justify it rationally and Machiavelli’s was a pioneer in
this direction.

Western Political Thought Loyola College, Williamnagar Page 14