The Prince, Chapter 23, Avoiding Flatterers

 

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, Chapter 23 

In What Mode Flatterers are to be Avoided 

[Translated by Harvey Mansfield]

I do not want to leave out an important point and an error from which princes defend themselves with difficulty unless they are very prudent or make good choices. And these are the flatterers of whom courts are full. 

For men take such pleasure in their own affairs, and so deceive themselves. They defend themselves with difficulty from this plague and in trying to defend oneself from it, risks the danger of becoming contemptible, for there is no other way to guard oneself from flattery. 

Unless men understand that they do not offend you in telling the truth, but when everyone can tell you the truth, they lack reverence for you. Therefore, a prudent Prince must hold to this mode, choosing wise men in his state, and only to these should he give freedom to speak the truth to him, and of those things, only that. He asks about and nothing else. But he should ask them about everything and should listen to their opinions. 

Then he should decide by himself in his own mode. And with these councils and with each member of them. He should behave in such a mode that everyone knows that the more freely he speaks, the more he will be accepted. Aside from these, he should not want to hear anyone. He should move directly to the thing that was decided and be obstinate in his decisions. Whoever does otherwise either falls head long because of flatterers or changes, often because. 

Of the variability of views from which a low estimation of him arises. I want to bring up a modern example in this regard. Father Luke. A man of the present Emperor Maximilian, Speaking of His Majesty, told how he did not take counsel from anyone and never did anything in his own mode. This arose from holding to. Policy contrary to that given above. For the Emperor is a secretive man who does not communicate his plans to anyone, nor seek their views. But as in putting them into effect, they begin to be known and disclosed, they begin to be contradicted by those whom he has around him. And he an agreeable person, is dissuaded from them. From this it arises the things he does. On one day he destroys on another that no one ever understands what he wants or plans to do, and that he cannot. And that one cannot found oneself on his decisions. 

A Prince, therefore, should always take counsel, but when he wants, and not when others want. On the contrary, he should discourage everyone from counseling him about anything unless he asks it of them. But he should be a very broad questioner. And then in regard to the things he asked about a patient listener to the truth, indeed he should become upset when he learns that anyone has any hesitation to. Speak to him. And since many esteem that any Prince who establishes an opinion of himself as prudent is so considered not because of his nature, but because of the good counsel he has around him, without doubt, they are deceived, for this is a general rule that never fails. 

That a Prince who is not wise by himself cannot be counseled. Well, unless indeed by chance he should submit himself to one alone to govern him in everything who was a very prudent man. In this case, he could well be, but it would not last long because that governor would, in a short time, take away the state. But by taking counsel for more than one, a Prince, who is not wise, will never have United Counsel, nor know by himself how to unite them. Each one of his counselors will think of his own interest. 

He will not know how to correct them or understand them, and they cannot be found otherwise, because men will always turn out bad for you unless they have been made good by a necessity. So one concludes that good counsel. From wherever it comes, must arise from the prudence of the Prince and not the prudence of the Prince from good counsel.

Machiavelli on the Problem of Monotheism

 

This week I listened to a talk by Harvard Professor Harvey Mansfield.  You can watch it here or listen to the podcast. One thing that came up which I had never considered before is how important it is that the Church (and the Temple and the Mosque) be separated from the state to have an effective government.

Machiavelli, like no political philosopher before him, squarely faced the problem of leading a government in a culture with a monotheistic religion. The Greek democracy and the Roman republic were not subject to absolute gods. Both fell to tyranny, but not to priests with power.

Monotheistic religions, especially at their extremes, see the entire universe as subject to their One God. Whether they are right or wrong in theology, we know what happens when priests control politics: Cruelty.

Eventually the heretics will be defined by prophets, condemned by priests and killed by mobs.

The brilliant, brave leaders who founded America knew this well. They wanted religion in the populace, but not in politics.

A priest, a Rabbi and an Imam can walk into a bar anytime they want to. But I never want them in charge of government.

----

I re-read The Prince every four years in a Presidential election year to remind myself how politics works.

I have written about Machiavelli on Leadership, about re-reading The Prince under Trump, and comparing Trump and President Obama using The Prince.

Re-Reading "The Prince" for the 10th Time: So Different Under Trump

Since 1980 I have read and re-read The Prince every four years. I have been delighted anew each year as I read his advice to rulers.  His central advice:

"A ruler must take power and keep power because without power the ruler can do nothing."

Until this year, reading Machiavelli was an act of cultural translation as well as being translated from 16th Century Italian.  I was reading advice to a monarch as a citizen of a republic.

That was then.

This year when I read The Prince I was reading as a citizen of a republic which is slouching slowly towards authoritarian government.

With Trump in office, I don't have to translate into democracy. His every instinct is authoritarian, so he grasps for power. He is limited only by his own willful ignorance and laziness.  But that limitation is glaring.

Machiavelli said the leader should constantly study war.  He recommends the leader go hunting to allow him to see his land up close and to know how it feels to live off the land.  Trump could not be farther from this advice. He is soft, delicate with no exposure to hardship, so some of the pathetic errors he makes would be remedied if he were not a physical and moral coward.

Trump wants to control and close the southern border.  If he spent time on the ground on that border, many of the issues would be clear to him.  The blazingly stupid foreign policy of abandoning the Kurds would not have happened if he were capable of exposing himself to hardship.

Thankfully, he is a gelatinous coward. Many of my worst predictions of what Trump would do have not come true, overwhelmed by Trump's own aversion to actual hardship.

Machiavelli says people are cowards and fools for the most part. They will swear loyalty to the leader when times are good and desert him when times are bad.

Trump knows and believes this. There are things Trump does exceedingly well because he knows he is talking to fools.  Machiavelli says the leader need not have actual religious faith, all that matters is the appearance. Despite bragging about breaking every commandment and being entitled to break every commandment, he draws thunderous applause from white Evangelical and conservative Catholic audiences.  The gaggle of millionaire televangelist that gather around to worship Trump declare Trump's true faith.

Machiavelli says that the leader must never use half measures. He must either pamper people or destroy them.  He also said if the leader has a choice either to be loved or feared, he should choose fear, because people will easily betray love but respect those who can hurt them. Within the Republican Party leadership, loyalty to Trump is based on fear of his twitter account.  In a party where the primary is the election, a Trump tweet can end the career of any red state Republican.

Another glaring Trump failure from Day One has been his inner circle. Machiavelli says we can judge the quality of a leader by the quality of his inner circle.  In this Trump is beyond pathetic.  Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, Betsy DeVos, Rudy Giuliani, Kellyanne Conway, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Mike Flynn, the rogue's gallery is endless. Trump's deplorable quality is evident in those who surround him.

Chapter 23 of The Prince says the leader should avoid flatterers.  This advice is pathetically funny. The vile chief of flatterers Mike Pence leads the worship of the Dear Leader. Kissing Trump's dumpy rump is a requirement for continued service in the administration.

Machiavelli ends his little book discussing fate and luck.  America has been lucky for nearly two and a half centuries to avoid the incarnation of idiocy that is Trump, but now it's here. Trump has been lucky at every step of his improbable rise from failed casino owner to the Racist-in-Chief.  Can his luck hold? I wish him and his minions nothing but failure, but the odds are with an incumbent, so I will fight until he is out of office.  And I will look for other places to live that will accept Americans and re-read The Prince in 2024 from somewhere far away from Don Junior's 2024 campaign.

In the meantime, I am re-reading On Tyranny for how to handle the present.

Book Report Part 4: Trump and Obama and Machiavelli

On November 8, starting at about 7 p.m., almost 63 million Americans were showing signs of depression and disbelief.  Me included.  As the night went on it became clear that a reality TV star, the most famous avowed racist[1] candidate since George Wallace of Alabama, was going to become the 45^th President of the United States.

WTF? 

Almost no one predicted it, even among the 60 million voters who decided “grabbing them by the pussy” was just something a 59-year-old man would say while wearing a microphone.  But Niccolo Machiavelli saw clearly how that Tangerine Tornado would sweep away all opposition and take the most powerful job in the world.

In his most famous book, The Prince, Machiavelli describes what works in politics, not how the world “should be.”  Machiavelli says the Prince (Leader) must “take power and keep power, for without power he can do nothing.”  While the world wondered what Trump really wanted, he kept charging forward and won.  And now he has the power. 

Trump beat 16 Republican opponents in the primaries before beating Hillary Clinton. How did he beat all of them?  Machiavelli says, “If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.” Trump lashed out at his opponents and kept at them until they gave up. Since he could not crush his toughest opponents all at once, he attacked them separately. He made temporary alliances with some, and then crushed them later. 

Ted Cruz fell for this like a bass snapping at bait.  Machiavelli says, “Since love and fear can hardly exist together, it is far safer to be feared than loved.” Trump kept Cruz close with flattery, then crushed.

Trump’s method points to the way he is likely to govern. When Cruz and others on his own side get out of line, he will attack them mercilessly, either by himself, or with his attack dogs at Breitbart, supplied by Steve Bannon.  As President Barack Obama leaves office, it is clear that one of his great failures was trying for years to get the Republicans to work with him.  Obama made deals, then the Republicans would back out or defy him.  Trump will not present his back to be stabbed as Obama did.  Trump may end democracy, but Congress will lose when they challenge him.

Trump told so many outright lies at his campaign rallies that even his most strident critics had trouble keeping track of the outrageous things he said. Yet Trump continued to flourish.  Why?  “Men are so simple and yield so readily to the desires of the moment that he who deceives will always find those willing to be deceived,” says the writer of The Prince.

Trump followed exactly one of the warnings from Machiavelli that President Obama flouted.  Machiavelli says that the people’s money should be spent in small amounts with great fanfare. President Obama gave away hundreds of billions of dollars to save the economy from depression in 2009. He took no credit.  Many people who owe their jobs to that bailout have no idea they were part of a government rescue program.  Obama’s people said, “We don’t spike the ball.” Sounds admirable, but the loss of the House, the Senate and many state governorships could have been slowed or avoided by taking credit for the way that money was spent.

When Trump saved several hundred jobs Carrier Corporation was sending to Mexico, he took full credit.  In addition, Trump used money from Indiana taxpayers for part of the package.  Machiavelli said the Prince can and should be generous with other people’s money.

For me, re-reading The Prince every four years allows me to keep score on politicians at every level.  With few exceptions, those that defy the advice of Machiavelli bring themselves down.  Machiavelli says that the Prince who touches the women of his subjects will be despised.  I could see this in the reaction to Trump’s “grab them by the pussy” comment.  At the time Trump said it, he was not in a political office.  Trump’s response was to attack Bill Clinton for women he slept with while in office, whether in the White House or the State House in Arkansas. Trump could effectively make the case that he was a private citizen and not subject to the same rules.  And 60 million voters clearly accepted that premise.

At just 68 pages of text, The Prince can read in a few hours and provide fun for a lifetime. 

Next post I will discuss the other political books I read in 2016.

---

[1] Beginning in 2011, Donald Trump rode the Birther lie to political prominence.  There is no reason to be a Birther except to discredit the President on racial and religious grounds. Every Birther is a racist.

Army vs. Civilian View of Human Nature

During the last week my co-workers, former co-workers and I said good bye to my supervisor Mary Ellen.  She is great at her job, going to a better job, and a really great person to work with.  Because most of those lauding her are also smart, funny and ironic, the praise was effusive but never maudlin.
My co-workers are librarians, archivists, writers, editors and historians.  Just the kind of people you would expect to think the best of others.  And Mary Ellen showed confirms their belief in the inherent goodness of people.  Most of them are much too ironic for a Patron Saint, but if they have a chosen philosopher it is Rosseau--people are good, only circumstances make us evil.

In a coincidence known only to me, Mary Ellen's last day of work was my first day of Army Annual Training.  So while I occasionally glanced at warm and sincere messages about Mary Ellen on my phone, I moved into the world green and camouflage world where everyone is a shit-bag unless proven otherwise.  Machiavelli is the Patron Saint here.

I had a brief hallway conversation with a guy I served with Iraq.  We were discussing some soldiers I had to supervise the following week and what I should do on the two days I would be going Michigan.

Without changing his tone at all he said, "There should be at least one of them who is not a total drooling idiot.  Leave that one in charge."

I admired the non-sexist way in which he left possibility that the one who could meet his very low standard could be a man or a woman.  I really do love both worlds, but the transitions are always strange.