Niccolo Machiavelli: Advice on Disarming

Gun Watch ^ | 31 December, 2015 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Niccolo Machiavelli is what some have called the first modern analyst of political power.  Some have called him the founder of modern political science.  Others have compared him to the Devil, as he showed the moral underbelly of political power.  He is widely honored on the left as showing how to use power to stay in power.  Most of the people who know of Machiavelli know him from his most famous work "The Prince".  "The Prince" is essentially a short course on how to get and keep political power. 

At the time it was written, it was a rather long job application, to show that he understood and would be useful in the world of political power.  In "The Prince", Machiavelli makes some observations about armed men.  One of them is a quote that I have used repeatedly. From "The Prince":

There is no comparison whatever between an armed and disarmed man; it is not reasonable to suppose that one who is armed will obey willingly one who is unarmed; or that any unarmed man will remain safe.... - Niccoló Machiavelli, The Prince. 1537.

But Machiavelli wrote another, much longer book that is not read or quoted nearly as often.  I refer to "The Discources".   "The Discourses" should be viewed as the longer, more thorough work from which "The Prince" is a shorted, abbreviated, version.  In "The Discourses", Machiavelli talks about using deception to achieve wanted ends.   He talks about the necessity of being deceptive when attempting to achieve an evil desire.  The example that he uses is that of disarming.  Here is the quote from The Discourses":

For it is enough to ask a man to give up his arms, without telling him that you intend killing him with them; after you have the arms in hand, then you can do your will with them."  The Discourses end of chapter XLIV

The quote is worth noting today, as a means of explaining why current disarmists must resort to lies and deceit.  They cannot put forward their real reasons. If they did, they could never pass the desired legislation. 

Machiavelli is worth quoting, because he is recognized as one of the founding fathers of modern state politics.  His pronouncements carry considerable weight in statist circles.  He is, essentially, an authority that statists have been taught to trust.

While not quite as definitive an authority for a statist as the Bible would be for a Christian, or the Koran for an Islamicist, Machiavelli holds considerable weight for those who worship at the alter of state power.   His words can be used to educate them to advantage.

Definition of  disarmist

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Machiavelli is an icon among Statists.

Everyone can learn useful things from reading The Prince.

[Perseverando]

But Machiavelli wrote another, much longer book that is not read or quoted nearly as often. I refer to "The Discources". "The Discourses" should be viewed as the longer, more thorough work from which "The Prince" is a shorted, abbreviated, version. In "The Discourses", Machiavelli talks about using deception to achieve wanted ends. He talks about the necessity of being deceptive when attempting to achieve an evil desire. The example that he uses is that of disarming. Here is the quote from The Discourses":

For it is enough to ask a man to give up his arms, without telling him that you intend killing him with them; after you have the arms in hand, then you can do your will with them." The Discourses end of chapter XLIV

If war is deception, then who is it that is waging war against the Constitution and the American people?

[Paine in the Neck]

I just got an email from UT/Austin regarding their policy vis a vis the new Campus Carry and Open Carry laws in TX. The germane section is

Be assured that UTPD has always, and will always, respond to reports of an armed individual. Anytime you see a weapon on campus, you should call the police (9-1-1).

Basically, Bob Harkins, Assoc. VP for Campus Safety and Security is asking that everyone who insists on exercising their constitutional right be swatted.

[traderrob6]

Kinda looks like Jim Parsons of the Big Bang Theory.

[DuncanWaring]

Rudyard Kipling on disarmament:

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us, and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."

[DesertRhino]

He was a decent man and there is a sarcasm through the works. He wasn’t writing an instruction manual as simple people usually think. He was giving a very pointed description of what he saw happening everywhere around him in government at the time with popes, and in the city states.
But of course, saying that directly would have had him killed quickly.
He wasn’t a despot. Nobody send to notice that he didn’t follow his own blueprint. It’s as dumb to call him father of evil as it would be to think Screwtape letters means CS Lewis wanted to teach people how to destroy others.

[Don Corleone]

"The Prince" is essentially a short course on how to get and keep political power.

In which he advised,"Keep an enemy at the city gates, even if you have to pay for him yourself". It still applies today, gun control, immigration,ISIS,etc. etc. etc.!

[Resolute Conservative]

Anyone that send their kids/money to UT needs therapy.

[Slyfox]

Here are some interesting factoids about Machiavelli's "The Prince."

Thomas Cromwell, adviser to Henry VIII, was well-schooled in "The Prince" and was single-handedly responsible for the irreparable demise of the freedom of the English people.

The first group to write substantially against Machiavelli were the early Jesuits.

Our Founding Fathers studied both of Machaivelli's famous writings in order to know the depths of evil power and to build a nation that could be immune to it all.

Saul Alinsky used "The Prince" as his inspiration when writing his books for the 60s radicals.

The modern embodiment of the implementing Machiavelli's evil power is the 44th president of the United States.

[FerociousRabbit]

Machiavelli wrote a number of lengthy books or discourses with “Discourses” in the title. The Prince was taken, largely, from Discourses on the Roman Republic.

Read it a million years ago in college. It was a dry but fascinating read. I would say that the much shorter book, The Prince, was a step-by-step blueprint for James Carville and Bill Clinton.

The much larger work, Discourses on the Roman Republic, fits Trump like a glove. The Prince pushes the subterfuge and “triangulation” aspects where “Discourses” actually pushes bold and brash leadership, nationalism and “fortuna,” letting the chips fall where they may (Trump’s banning muslims idea comes to mind), not to mention cowing your enemies (Trump does so verbally, Machiavelli would suggest mass execution among other things) and getting the peasants on your side.

[Lurker]

Excellent analysis.

L

[CharlesOConnell]

An alternative interpretation says that The Prince was a satire and that Machiavelli spent time in prison because of it.

Disarm private government police forces not authorized by any constituents.

Newspapers that publish legitimate gun owners' addresses, publish searchable databases of unmarked government vehicles for reporting public servants' misbehavior to their agencies' Risk Management.

[DesertRhino]

Cromwell saved England from monarchs and helped move it away from the papacy. Unfortunately England fell and went back into the slavery of monarchist rule.
As for the Jesuits disliking him, yes, they saw he was recording the method of the Borgias who he once worked for. His book was listed on the index of forbidden books precisely because it carefully documented the behaviors extant in the Vatican and the city states.

Machiavelli was essentially warning the world of what despots do and how they behave. He wrote from a view in the middle of it where he carefully was able to survive. He was tortured by the Medici family. He fell in with poets and writers. He never held high office as a ruler, and perpetrated no atrocities. His book was a warning about the kind of people surrounding him in renaissance Italy. Some Vatican, some from noble families running the city states.

Is a shame to see people believe he thought his prince was his dream. It was his nightmare.

[Slyfox]

Yes, the Wheel of Fortuna was not very kind to him.

[Billthedrill]

Machiavelli was writing the Discourses, more formally Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy while he was writing The Prince. People neglect some pretty important facts when they regard Machiavelli as a statist: (1) he was a republican, and the main point of the Discourses is to demonstrate that a republic, not an autocratic state, was the best form of government both for ancient Rome and for contemporary Florence; (2) he was Florence's minister of defense while the Medici were out of power and his Art of War is a learned disquisition on Renaissance military practice not from a theoretical but a practical standpoint; (3) the return of the Medici to autocratic power was not a particularly happy event for Machiavelli - he ended up on the rack; (4) The Prince has been called an attempt to ingratiate himself with the new bosses (but has also been called bitter satire).

Livy himself was exquisitely aware of the dangers of too much candor extolling the virtues of republicanism but he managed it anyway - during his lifetime even Augustus had to bow to the popular preference for the ancient Republic and pretend that his government was not imperial. Understand, though, that this form of Republic was not a popularly-elected government.

For a fuller sense of Machiavelli's actual views on government it is also helpful to read his Florentine Histories. He was certainly no academic or dilettante, but a practical politician whose own theory was hardened by experience.

[newfreep]

Knowing Parsons is a flaming homosexual makes it difficult to watch that show...and Kaley Cuoco, in her more fit moments, is exceptionally hot.

[Pollster1]

The leaders of America’s enemies are quite well educated. They have read Machiavelli, Ayn Rand, and George Orwell, as thoroughly as have many conservatives. The difference is conservatives considers those books to be warnings, while big government liberals and other socialists consider them to be blueprints.

[Jacquerie]

Perhaps you have read The Prince.

Since most Freepers don't bother to read beyond article titles, it is likely that few actually know firsthand of Machiavelli's works at all. With that in mind, and in Machiavelli's defense:

In his Discourses on Livy are lessons on how the Roman Republic survived for 400+ years. Subsequent philosophers like Locke and Sidney were well aware of his research. They in turn were influential on America's Founding and Framing generations.

[RandallFlagg]

Some of my favorite quotes:

“A covenant not to defend myself from force by force is always void. For, as I have shown before, no man can transfer or lay down his right to save himself from death, wounds, and imprisonment, the avoiding whereof is the only end of laying down any right; and therefore the promise of not resisting force, in no covenant transferreth any right, nor is obliging.”
Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679). Of Man, Being the First Part of Leviathan.
__________________________________________________________________________________

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that it has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are of such a nature. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Cesare Beccaria On Crimes and Punishments (87-88)
__________________________________________________________________________________

“The main foundations of every state, new states as well as ancient or composite ones, are good laws and good arms - you cannot have good laws without good arms, and where there are good arms, good laws inevitably follow.”
Niccolo Machiavelli
__________________________________________________________________________________

“that we may now give away, by a vote, what it may cost the dying groans of thousands to recover; that we may now surrender, with a little ink, what it may cost seas of blood to regain”
Thomas Treadwell

[marktwain]

“The much larger work, Discourses on the Roman Republic, fits Trump like a glove. The Prince pushes the subterfuge and “triangulation” aspects where “Discourses” actually pushes bold and brash leadership, nationalism and “fortuna,” letting the chips fall where they may (Trump’s banning muslims idea comes to mind), not to mention cowing your enemies (Trump does so verbally, Machiavelli would suggest mass execution among other things) and getting the peasants on your side.”

Noticed that too. Very astute of you.

Yes, the Donald is right there in the pages of The Discources on the Roman Republic.

I would give strong odds that The Donald has read The Discources on the Roman Republic.

My copy is a reprint combo, and it simply says “The Prince and The Discources”