DISCOURSES ON LIVY | Machiavelli's REAL Opinions

Summary

Dr. Moore explores Machiavelli's 'Discourses on Livy,' offering a nuanced view of the political thinker. He challenges the common 'Machiavellian' stereotype, emphasizing Machiavelli's aim to benefit society through innovative political strategies rooted in ancient wisdom. The discussion delves into the Florentine's complex relationship with religion, his belief in the necessity of state religion, and his controversial views on the cyclical nature of political regimes, advocating for robust institutions over individual rulers to ensure stability and the common good.

Takeaways

• 📚 Machiavelli's work is often misunderstood, with 'The Prince' overshadowing his more comprehensive 'Discourses on Livy', which offers a nuanced view of his political philosophy.
• 🔍 Dr. Moore suggests that Machiavelli's intent was to help people by proposing political structures that could bring about common benefit, contrary to his reputation for advocating deceit and violence.
• 🕊️ Machiavelli believed in looking to ancient, pre-Christian models to innovate and move politics forward, breaking away from the Christian conventions of his time.
• 🌏 He emphasized the importance of understanding both contemporary and ancient politics, using an analysis of Livy's 'Histories of Rome' as a foundation for his political theories.
• 🧐 The script discusses the concept of 'Machiavellianism', which is often associated with unscrupulous tactics in politics, a notion derived primarily from 'The Prince'.
• 🕰️ It is suggested that Machiavelli's work took considerable time to write, with 'The Prince' and 'Discourses on Livy' possibly being worked on concurrently.
• 💭 The opening of 'Discourses on Livy' addresses human envy and the blame-oriented nature of mankind, which Machiavelli sees as a challenge to introducing new political orders.
• 🌐 Machiavelli's political philosophy is rooted in a deep skepticism about the relationship between politics and metaphysics, particularly questioning divine involvement in human affairs.
• 🏛️ He advocates for a republican form of government that combines elements of principality, aristocracy, and popular rule to create a balanced and stable political system.
• 🛡️ The script highlights Machiavelli's focus on institutions over individuals for the sake of political stability and longevity, recognizing the mortality and fallibility of individual rulers.
• ⛪️ Religion plays a significant role in Machiavelli's thought, with the belief that a state religion can instill virtue and maintain social order, although he criticizes Christianity as practiced in the 16th century.
• 🛑 Machiavelli's discourses also touch on the potential for decline in political systems and the need for extraordinary measures, including violence, to restore order when institutions fail.

Q & A

What is the primary misconception about Machiavelli based on his most famous work, 'The Prince'?

The primary misconception is that Machiavelli is synonymous with deception, ambition, trickery, and violence, which is often referred to as 'Machiavellianism'. This idea comes from 'The Prince', but the script suggests that 'The Discourses' provides a more nuanced view of Machiavelli's thoughts.

Why does Machiavelli choose to write about politics through an interpretation of Livy's 'Histories of Rome'?

Machiavelli uses Livy's 'Histories of Rome' as a way to go back to the ancient, pre-Christian world. This allows him to break out of the Christian conventions and premises of his time, enabling him to think about politics in new ways and innovate.

What is the significance of the opening paragraph of 'The Discourses' in relation to Machiavelli's approach to politics?

The opening paragraph of 'The Discourses' introduces the idea of Machiavelli as an explorer charting a new course for politics. It suggests that he is driven by a desire to work for the common benefit of everyone, despite the potential for envy and blame from others.

How does Machiavelli's view on human nature influence his approach to lawmaking?

Machiavelli believes that lawmakers should presuppose that all people are bad and will act on their malignity when given the opportunity. This view is based on the belief that people, when free to choose, often act in anti-social and self-interested ways, which should be considered when creating laws.

What is Machiavelli's perspective on the relationship between politics and metaphysics?

Machiavelli seems to doubt the relationship between politics and metaphysics. He does not believe that God involves Himself in human politics, and that divine intervention does not necessarily reward just and prudent actions or punish the wicked and sinful in politics.

Why does Machiavelli argue that Christianity, as practiced in the 16th century, is politically problematic?

Machiavelli believes that the version of Christianity practiced in the 16th century may not function well as a state religion due to its teachings and practices, which could be at odds with the political stability and success he envisions.

What does Machiavelli propose as the solution to prevent regimes from collapsing into their vicious forms?

Machiavelli proposes republicanism as the solution. He suggests that a well-ordered republic combines elements of principality, aristocracy, and popular rule, with each serving as a check on the others, preventing any one group or office from dominating.

How does Machiavelli view the importance of institutions in maintaining political stability?

Machiavelli emphasizes the importance of institutions over individuals because institutions provide stability that outlasts the mortality of any one person, especially a ruler. He believes that institutions, including state religion, are crucial for the longevity and stability of a regime.

What is Machiavelli's critique of Julius Caesar in the context of 'The Discourses'?

Machiavelli criticizes Julius Caesar for attempting to overthrow the Roman Republic and install a dictatorship. He argues that Caesar's actions led to the decline of institutions and the rise of hereditary monarchy, which is subject to the whims of fortune and not conducive to long-term political stability.

How does Machiavelli address the issue of political decline and the potential need for extraordinary measures to restore order?

Machiavelli acknowledges that political decline may require extraordinary measures, such as the actions of a strong leader or the refounding of a state. However, he also recognizes the violence and suffering that such measures entail and suggests that they are necessary to prevent further decline and collapse.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Machiavelli's Misunderstood Intentions

Dr. Moore introduces Niccolò Machiavelli, a figure often associated with deception and political cunning, yet argues that Machiavelli's true aim was to help people. The video focuses on 'Discourses on Livy,' a work that provides a more nuanced view of Machiavelli's political philosophy compared to his more infamous 'The Prince.' Moore suggests that Machiavelli sought to innovate politics by revisiting ancient, pre-Christian models, implying a move away from the Christian conventions of his time. The summary touches on the potential length of time Machiavelli spent writing the 'Discourses' and his initial discussion of envy as a fundamental human trait, setting the stage for his exploration of politics.

05:02

🤔 The Dilemma of Political and Moral Success

This paragraph delves into the complex relationship between political success and moral righteousness. Dr. Moore discusses Machiavelli's view that political outcomes can sometimes be at odds with morality, where wicked actions might lead to political prosperity. This paradox is central to the concept of 'the ends justify the means.' Moore also explores Machiavelli's thoughts on religion, particularly Christianity's role in state politics during the 16th century, suggesting that Machiavelli found it problematic for maintaining political stability. The summary emphasizes Machiavelli's belief in the need for a state religion and his conception of the good life, which includes freedom, security, peace, and prosperity, potentially achieved through extreme measures.

10:03

🏛 The Structure of Republics and Political Stability

Dr. Moore examines Machiavelli's analysis of different political regimes, including monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, and their corrupt counterparts. Machiavelli argues that good regimes can easily devolve into their corrupt forms due to human nature's inclination towards evil. To prevent this, he proposes a republican system that combines elements of the three good regimes, creating a system of checks and balances. The summary highlights Machiavelli's belief in the importance of institutions over individuals for achieving political stability and longevity, as well as his emphasis on the role of the consuls, senate, and tribunes in the Roman Republic as an example of this balance.

15:04

👑 The Dangers of Hereditary Monarchy and the Role of Religion

In this section, Dr. Moore discusses Machiavelli's critique of hereditary monarchy, particularly focusing on Julius Caesar's role in transitioning from a republic to a dictatorship. Machiavelli views this as a negative shift from institutions to individuals, exposing the state to the whims of fortune. The summary points out the importance Machiavelli places on religion and its role in fostering a culture of virtue and maintaining political stability over time. Moore also mentions Machiavelli's belief that a state's endurance is more likely when its people are habituated to virtue through good laws and orders.

20:05

🛡 The Necessity of Extraordinary Measures in Political Renewal

The final paragraph explores Machiavelli's views on the decline of states and the potential for renewal through extraordinary measures. Dr. Moore notes that while institutions are the preferred means of maintaining stability, there are times when a state's decay may require a strong leader to restore order. However, this comes with the caveat that such a leader's impact may not be lasting, as their mortality poses a challenge to long-term stability. The summary reflects on the violent and disruptive nature of such political revolutions and the difficult choices that Machiavelli presents between decline and dictatorship, prompting viewers to consider the implications of these ideas for contemporary politics.

Keywords

💡Machiavelli

Niccolò Machiavelli was an Italian diplomat, philosopher, and writer best known for his political treatise 'The Prince.' In the context of the video, he is discussed as a figure often associated with deception and political cunning, but also as someone who aimed to help people and provide a nuanced view of politics, particularly through his work 'Discourses on Livy.'

💡Machiavellianism

The term 'Machiavellianism' refers to a set of behaviors characterized by deceit, manipulation, and self-interest in the pursuit of power, often associated with Machiavelli's political philosophy. The video discusses how this term originated from Machiavelli's most famous work and how it shapes the common perception of his ideas.

💡Discourses on Livy

This is the title of a work by Machiavelli, which is a detailed analysis of Titus Livy's 'Histories of Rome.' The video emphasizes that 'Discourses on Livy' provides a more comprehensive understanding of Machiavelli's political thought, including his ideas on the nature of politics and the structure of republics.

💡Renaissance

The Renaissance was a period of cultural rebirth in Europe marked by the revival of interest in the classical antiquity. The video mentions Machiavelli's Renaissance maneuver of looking back to the ancient world to innovate and rethink politics, which was a common intellectual pursuit of the time.

💡Envy

In the script, envy is presented as a foundational aspect of human psychology, which Machiavelli uses to illustrate the challenges of introducing new political orders. The video references how envy is addressed in the preface of 'Discourses on Livy,' suggesting it as a driving force that must be managed in political innovation.

💡Republic

A republic is a form of government where power resides in the people or their representatives. The video discusses Machiavelli's views on republics as a political structure that combines elements of principalities, aristocracies, and popular rule to create a balanced and stable system.

💡Institutions

In the context of the video, institutions are presented as the framework of laws and organizations that provide stability and continuity in a political system. Machiavelli's emphasis on institutions over individuals is highlighted as a means to prevent the rise and fall of political regimes.

💡Julius Caesar

Julius Caesar is a historical figure discussed in the video as someone who attempted to overthrow the Roman Republic and establish a dictatorship. Machiavelli criticizes Caesar for destabilizing the republic and moving from institutional governance to individual rule, which he sees as detrimental to political stability.

💡Religion

The video mentions the role of religion in politics according to Machiavelli, who believed in the importance of a state religion to instill virtue and maintain social order. He considered the founder of Roman religion, Numa, to be more significant than the founder of Rome itself, indicating the high value he placed on religion for political stability.

💡Virtue

Virtue, in the context of the video, refers to the moral excellence and positive qualities that contribute to the common good. Machiavelli believed that a well-ordered society should cultivate virtue among its citizens, which would help maintain political stability and prevent decline.

💡Decline

Decline, as discussed in the video, is the process of deterioration or decay in a political system. Machiavelli's work is examined for insights on how to prevent or mitigate political decline, with a focus on the importance of institutions and the potential role of great individuals in times of crisis.

Highlights

Machiavelli's work is often misunderstood as promoting deception and violence, but the key to understanding him is recognizing his desire to help people.

Machiavelli's 'Discourses on Livy' offers a more nuanced view of his political philosophy compared to 'The Prince'.

Machiavelli's political thought diverges from Christian conventions, suggesting a pre-Christian world view for political innovation.

The 'Discourses' begins with a discussion on envy, reflecting Machiavelli's view of human psychology.

Machiavelli positions himself as a political explorer, seeking new ways in politics by revisiting ancient wisdom.

Machiavelli's approach to politics is rooted in a deep doubt about the relationship between politics and metaphysics.

He challenges the idea that divine intervention plays a role in human politics, suggesting politics is a human construct.

Machiavelli's political thought includes the controversial idea that the ends may justify the means, even if the means are morally questionable.

He advocates for a state religion, suggesting it plays a crucial role in maintaining political stability.

Machiavelli critiques Christianity as practiced in the 16th century, considering it politically problematic.

He emphasizes the importance of institutions over individuals for the longevity and stability of a political system.

Machiavelli's analysis of the six regimes suggests that virtuous forms can easily degrade into their vicious counterparts.

Republicanism is presented as a solution to prevent the collapse of regimes into their vicious forms, by combining elements of principality, aristocracy, and popular rule.

Machiavelli's discourses highlight the role of institutions in providing stability that outlasts the life of any individual ruler.

The critique of Julius Caesar illustrates Machiavelli's preference for institutions over individual rulers, regardless of their personal virtues.

Machiavelli discusses the importance of religion in establishing a culture of virtue and maintaining political order.

He acknowledges the potential for a single individual to restore political order but recognizes the limitations due to the individual's mortality.

Machiavelli's work raises questions about the necessity of extraordinary measures, including violence, for the establishment of a stable political order.

The discourses end with a reflection on the challenges of evaluating when a state is in decline and in need of political innovation or genius.

Transcripts

his name is synonymous with deception

ambition trickery violence but

machiavelli wants to help people and i

think this is this is key to

understanding his work my name is dr

moore i make videos about great books we

are going to talk about machiavelli's

discourses on libby

so we we know machiavelli mostly from

the prince right that's that's the most

famous work he wrote that's the one we

always study it's the one we assign in

classes it's the one we read

it's the one we remember it's from the

prince that we get this idea of

machiavellianism that's when we say

machiavellian we're talking about the

prince but i think in in the discourses

we get a a more robust more

comprehensive picture maybe a more

nuanced picture of machiavelli who he

was and what he thought so maggie veli

is writing about politics about

contemporary politics and ancient

politics

but

the way he's doing that is is by writing

this interpretation of libby this

analysis this reading

of titus libby's histories of rome and

part of the reason for that this is a

kind of classic renaissance maneuver

machiavelli is going back to the ancient

world

really a pre-christian world that i

think is the most important thing

uh he's going backward in order

to move forward

right he wants us to to begin thinking

about politics in new ways and that

means somehow uh breaking out of

the the christian

conventions and premises of his time and

in order to do that in order to innovate

machiavelli needs to go back to the

ancients it's a bit unclear

uh how long it took him to write the

discourses he was he was working on the

book in 1513 that's when he's also

writing the prince may have taken him as

long as 1519 to complete it the book

begins with envy

and v i think that's a notable

uh thing right that that envy seems to

be part of his

uh his founding sort of image of human

psychology right although the envious

nature of men has always made it no less

dangerous to find new modes and orders

than to seek unknown waters and lands

because men are more ready to blame than

to praise the actions of others

nonetheless driven by that natural

desire that has always been in me to

work without any respect

for those things i believe will bring

common benefit to everyone

i have decided to take a path as yet

untrodden by anyone

and if it brings me trouble and

difficulty

it could also bring me reward through

those who consider humanely the end of

these labors of mine so

many interesting things in in this

opening paragraph this is the preface to

the first book the first volume of the

discourses

um

first he begins with envy and then he

also represents himself as an explorer

right so this goes back to the idea of

you know machiavelli as an innovator

he's uh he's charting a new course for

politics something that has not been

done before he says

but his method for doing this thing that

hasn't been done before is going to be

to go all the way back danger problem

right to the ancients

something very old in order to achieve

something very new what i'm going to be

doing here

i think today is is offering the

charitable interpretation of machiavelli

i think that's what i want to do i want

to read his work humanely and i want to

take him at his word dangerous with

machiavelli but i want to take him at

his word that he means to bring

common benefit to everyone

machiavelli wants to help us

machiavelli wants to help people that's

what he wants

that's what he really cares about maybe

surprising to you

his name is synonymous with

with deception with uh ambition

trickery

violence but machiavelli wants to help

people and i think this is this is key

to understanding his work his work in

the discourses machiavelli to sort of

understand what he's trying to

accomplish we need to we need to think a

bit about his project i think the

problem

that machiavelli confronts

is kind of deep

doubt

about

the relationship between politics and

metaphysics

let's put it that way previous political

thinkers other kinds of political

thinkers aristotle plato christian

thinkers like aquinas they understood

politics

and law

to

be rooted in some sense

in the universal

right in in in the divine machiavelli

doesn't seem to subscribe to that view

there's some debate about

whether he's a christian or not um you

may even find that laughable to even

think that but what does seem to be

beyond debate is that machiavelli

doesn't seem to believe

that

god

involves himself in human politics so

that it does not seem to be the case

that god

rewards

people who are just and prudent

and punishes those

who are wicked and sinful politically

speaking it might be the case

that those who who do wicked things

sinful things

even evil things

succeed politically and here i think is

is

the real problem it might be the case

that a political leader can do

a wicked thing an evil thing and not

only will it bring the ruler success the

leader success but

it may result

in benefits

for

most other people

the state

may flourish because of the wickedness

of the ruler because of the wickedness

of the ruler this i think is is what

machiavelli perceives in the world this

is kind of the root of the idea that the

the ends justify the means right this

this notion that maybe doing the

underhanded doing the deceitful doing

the wicked or the sinful thing

will result in a good end machiavelli

will say lots of interesting things in

this book about about religion um

he believes very strongly that there

should be a state religion he will say

that at one point

he will

claim that christianity

at least as it as it is practiced in the

16th century

is politically problematic

it's not clear whether he he means by

that that

you know you cannot have that

christianity will not function as a

state religion i don't know if he thinks

that or if he thinks there's a version

of christianity or an interpretation of

christianity that may actually function

as a state religion i think that's an

open question for him although i don't

know maybe it's not but certainly as

readers i i think there's different ways

to interpret what he's saying about

about christianity but certainly he

believes that christianity as it exists

uh in the 16th century

uh is a political problem but overall

machiavelli doesn't seem to think that

you know appeals to divinity or

living a pious life

leads to political success prayer does

not seem to be good political policy for

machiavelli but machiavelli does have a

pretty clear conception of

the good

of what a good human life looks like

and he does seem to

desire a kind of politics that promotes

that kind of life that is conducive to

freedom to security to peace even

uh maybe that was a little little

trickier but but certainly to freedom

certainly to security certainly to

prosperity

uh and maybe even piety so he has this

conception of the good life that looks a

lot like the good life that we might

imagine or you know any kind of pious

religious person might imagine the

question is really how do we achieve

that good life

and machiavelli

seems to think

it may require

extreme measures we may need to take

extreme measures

to achieve that kind of a life so as an

early indication of this i just want to

look at at the beginning of chapter 3 in

volume one machiavelli says this as all

those demonstrate who reason on a civil

way of life and as every history is full

of examples

it is necessary to whoever disposes a

republic and orders laws in it to

presuppose that all men are bad and that

they always have to use the malignity of

their spirit whenever they have free

opportunity for it this is quite a

fascinating claim i think and we need to

be we need to be pretty precise about

what he's saying here because

on the one hand he seems to be saying

all men are bad all people are bad but i

think he's saying something a bit more

specific that if you look at history or

if you meditate upon or think about a

civil way of life you will recognize

that a lawmaker

needs to presuppose

that all people are bad which is a

little different than saying all people

are bad it's to say that good public

policy good good legislation

begins from the premise that people are

bad and what he's arguing there you know

there's there's something out of uh

proto-hobbsian in this in this view

right that if people are are free to

choose

at liberty to do what they will

they will often will bad things right

anti-social things uh greedy things

self-interested things things that that

are contrary to to justice and community

you may disagree with that but but

there's a lot of evidence such as that

people are inclined that way lots of

people are inclined that way and

uh it makes a certain degree of sense

that we would begin from the premise

right if we're trying to set up a a

secure free prosperous community that we

have that in mind right that this this

sort of drive this this psychological

reality that that people are likely to

do bad things if given the choice that

we may need to begin when law making

from that premise and so here i think we

can see a certain extremity in in

machiavelli's political premises begin

from the premise that all people are bad

all right

like

you know it's uh oh but his view seems

to be that starting

from that place gets us

to a good place and we begin to see that

as he begins talking about republics

right the prince is his book about

principalities he also talks about

principalities in the discourses but

this is really his book about republics

so particularly when machiavelli is

talking about republics the way

republics are structured

we can see the way that his his

understanding of human evil might

lead

towards a politics that produces good

ends he talks about the six regimes he's

engaging here with with plato and

aristotle what machiavelli says about

the six regimes right six regimes

monarchy aristocracy uh maybe like a

polity and then you've got tyranny

oligarchy and democracy machiavelli says

okay uh you know traditionally we

understand

there to be three virtuous forms and

three vicious forms

but what he says about the six regimes

is quite remarkable it's again kind of

proto-hobbsian he says

those that are good are the three

written above those that are bad or the

three others depend on these three he

says each one of them is similar to the

one next to it so that they easily leap

from one to the other for the

principality easily becomes tyrannical

the aristocrats with ease become a state

of the few the popular is without

difficulty converted into the licentious

so he says you know the the difference

between a monarchy and a tyranny is not

very great machiavelli might be thinking

in particular in terms of time that any

monarchy you have in a short span of

time will become a tyrant any

aristocracy you have in a short span of

time will become an oligarchy and

this leads him to say right again like

because human beings are bad or you know

because most human beings are bad or

because we have bad inclinations

whatever the result is

you can't count on a monarchy staying

good or an aristocracy staying good

those regimes will over time collapse

into their vicious forms so

this then leads machiavelli to think

through how do we prevent that how do we

we prevent the collapse of regimes into

these vicious forms and

his solution

which he takes from livy from from

studying the roman model is

republicanism i say thus that all the

said modes are pastiferous because of

the brevity of life in the three good

ones and because the malignity in the

three bad so those who prudently order

laws having recognized this defect

avoiding each of these modes by itself

chose one that shared in all

judging it firmer and more stable for

the one guards the other since in one in

the same city

there are the principality the

aristocrats and the popular government

so what machiavelli says about the

republic is that it's three regimes in

one you have in the republic

properly constituted

a principality an aristocracy and some

form of popular rule and for machiavelli

this is uh this is evident in the the

position of the consuls

who are like kings

the senate which is the rule of the few

and then the many who are given

political authority

especially through the tribunes so you

have the popular will the will of the

wealthy or the virtuous and

you know the the prudence or expertise

of

of singular rulers all kind of working

in a way together

but also against each other because

machiavelli again he's counting

on envy right he's counting on on

ambition on envy on self-interest but

the way he's sort of what he sees in

rome and what he advises for all of us

is to design a regime in such a way that

these these various competing

self-interests

function as a check on each other and

it's through that kind of model

machiavelli thinks that we will achieve

political stability and that no one

group or one office will be able to

tyrannize

over everyone else and this i think is

one of the striking things about about

machiavelli's discourses is there's an

emphasis throughout

on institutions

i think machiavelli you know if you read

the discourses carefully what you find

is this trajectory

away from individuals

towards institutions and the reason uh

the reason we get this emphasis on

institutions is because institutions

provide for stability and it's a kind of

stability in particular that will

outlast

the the individual life the mortality of

any one person and especially any one

ruler because even if you have a great

ruler a virtuous ruler some kind of

genius machiavellian ruler that guy will

die

eventually that person will die and once

that person dies

all bets are off and this this is

communicated i think maybe like most

effectively most remarkably in the 10th

chapter of volume 1 where machiavelli

talks about julius caesar now you know

at first you might think that julius

caesar is exactly the kind of person

that machiavelli would admire if you've

read the prince you might think well

julius caesar ambitious

calculating warlike great general

brilliant strategist that is that is a

machiavellian ruler if ever there was

one incorrect maggie belly hates julius

caesar hates him and when you when you

think about why he hates julius caesar

what what his critique is specifically

you start to get a sense of

machiavelli's whole project in the

discourses on libby and maybe

you see his life's work in a different

light because what machiavelli says in

chapter 10 he says okay he talks about

various types of people who are

universally admired and he says founders

of religions founders of states great

generals artists these are the types of

people that that we admire

that we glorify

and he says the contrary is that we

vilify and denounce

and and revile

people who destroy those things and one

such person is julius caesar because

julius caesar according to machiavelli

and you know i think he's right

is

a person

who attempted to

overthrow a republic and install a

dictatorship and and partly succeeded

caesar machiavelli says is responsible

for all these terrible things not

necessarily and this is him so important

not necessarily because caesar himself

was a bad ruler

but because he overturned the republic

and thus instead of moving from

individuals to institutions we move from

institutions to individuals

and what happens when we move to

individuals

what happens we move to a hereditary

form of monarchy and a hereditary

monarchy machiavelli says

is is basically putting yourself in the

power of fortune

luck chance you don't know what's gonna

happen the emperor's child who becomes

the next emperor could be great

more likely they won't be right will not

be as good and could be absolutely

terrible you have no controls for that

and the political consequences are dire

that is precisely the kind of problem

that

republican institutions are designed to

protect against it's notable too in this

section of the discourses machiavelli

moves from here to a long discussion of

religion and the importance of religion

and he even says that numa who who

brought religion to rome is more

important than romulus who founded rome

and that you know suggests something

about how the

high priority that machiavelli places on

religion state religion remarkable the

reason the reason he does that

is because he understands that through

religion right you're you're installing

a kind of culture a system of virtue an

account of the good life ceremonies

rituals these kinds of things

that will allow regimes

to persist across time and that that is

always what machiavelli is thinking

about maggie belly cares about people

and he is trying to find a way to secure

regimes against decay politics decays

states decay states rise and they fall

machiavelli says there's no point in in

pretending that states don't fall states

fall

how do you protect how do you prevent

collapse he doesn't seem to believe you

can do it forever so you're really just

trying to do it for as long as you can

and so institutions religion become

important parts of that and then you can

you can sustain things for as long as

possible and you can prevent political

decline you can put it off as long as

possible and in that section of the

discourses he says you know when you've

got a

population of people who has been

habituated to virtue in the kind of

machiavellian sense by good orders and

good laws

then they're more likely to maintain

themselves free and disruptions tumult

scandals that's not going to to spell

doom but

if people have become corrupt

uh if if the institutions have decayed

if uh if you know the state religion

has declined and the people have become

corrupt then then it's going to be easy

for the state to collapse and he says

there is still as in the prince this

emphasis on on great individuals

because he seems to point when things go

wrong and this is you know if we're

democrats this is this is a

an unsettling idea but you know a

characteristically machiavellian idea

that you know one great person

can

restore

order right or or can bring about a kind

of political revolution again you know

because of our understanding of history

that's a potentially disturbing idea but

he seems to believe strongly in this now

the limitation of course he says is the

lifetime

of that of that great leader that

dictator so he says that if you've got a

disordered regime

you might have this this one guy who who

shows up and restores order who who

revitalizes the state but then if that

person dies

then it falls back into decline right

and he says the cause is that there

cannot be one man of such long life as

to have enough time to nur to good a

city that has been inured to bad for a

long time if one individual a very long

life or two virtuous ones continued in

succession do not arrange it when they

are lacking as was said above it is

ruined unless indeed he makes it be

reborn with many dangers and much blood

so you know here we get both you know

the good and bad of machiavelli or the

dark side of machiavelli reemerges but

what do we do if we don't you know if we

don't have the institutions in place or

if our institutions are in decline

machiavelli's answer is a little

disturbing again here we get this

emphasis on mortality right so

we can't count on individuals

individuals have to give way to

institutions as quickly as possible but

there's also for him always this sense

that

you know when institutions have failed

when they've declined when when whole

cultures are corrupt

it's only through these these great

people who are going to

uh restore or renew or innovate in a way

that you know leads to the common good

but

that act of of restoration of refounding

or founding new regimes

you know machiavelli's clear-eyed about

this it's it's always violent and it's

always terrible and it and it requires

extraordinary measures he says right so

these moments of history

are

bloody and bad

we don't want to live in them

machiavelli

seems to think

such periods are necessary because the

alternative is just collapse

which which he thinks is is also also

leads

to

uh suffering widespread suffering and

violence and hardship and poverty right

so

for him

the comparison is not between like a

peaceful well-ordered regime and one run

by

you know a dictator for him

the choices between

the the dictatorial spirit the

you know the armed prophet maybe who's

gonna come along and and set things

right or

a declining state that's probably gonna

be conquered right that's gonna be

invaded enslaved

destroyed whatever now our criticism i

think our question for accumulate could

be is this a false binary right is this

a false choice isn't there maybe

peace you know as a third option maybe

we don't have to choose between decline

and dictator and the other thing you

know i think we we need to think

seriously about you know another thing

might be is there some other form of

renewal of institutional renewal or

cultural renewal that would not require

extraordinary measures that would not

require

violence and suffering that's i think a

good question i think the thing we'd

really want to be watchful of right is

this idea that okay the state is in

decline and now is the time when we need

the strong-armed uh visionary to come in

and set things all right well how do we

know that that now is the time

strong-armed you know visionaries with

with violent tendencies they are always

around and they are always incentivized

to to overthrow existing orders and

establish new orders and uh they're not

always good sometimes sometimes they're

julius caesar right and they're

overthrowing a stable regime

to satisfy their own ambition so one of

the real problems i think we're left

with is is when

uh how to evaluate when we are in a

state of decline

and maybe in need

of some innovative political genius

and

when

the innovative political genius is

actually a real threat to the common

good that's a real problem as i said my

name is dr moore i teach great books at

st thomas university if you found this

video useful you might want to check out

one of these over here thanks very much

i will talk to you soon