History Literature / ThePrince

15th May '18 9:36:35 AM ThraggLootrippa
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Advocates who feel that the book is a parody of the genre point out, that rather than offering a simple one-stop solution, Machiavelli by discussing how politics work, is actually telling the Prince that he's never going to have a moment's rest, a true Prince/King/Ruler would be an absolute paranoid wreck who is SlaveToPR, always worried if he's Loved/Feared/Hated. In effect, the advise and picture given in the book is impossible to actually follow.

to:

** Advocates who feel that the book is a parody of the genre point out, that rather than offering a simple one-stop solution, Machiavelli by discussing how politics work, is actually telling the Prince that he's never going to have a moment's rest, a true Prince/King/Ruler would be an absolute paranoid wreck who is SlaveToPR, and always worried worrying if he's Loved/Feared/Hated. In effect, the advise advice and picture given in the book is impossible to actually follow.
9th May '18 12:27:46 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Written by Italian statesman Creator/NiccoloMachiavelli in 1513, ''The Prince'' (''Il Principe'') is the single most famous political treatise and the first entirely secular work of UsefulNotes/TheRenaissance. At the time it was first published, ''The Prince'' was seen as extremely scandalous for its endorsement of ruthlessness and amorality. Nevertheless, it quickly became popular with politicians and remains highly influential in Western politics today. If there's any MagnificentBastard in ''anything'' set after the Renaissance, it's very probable he's taken cues from this book.[[note]]Although they aren't quite as likely to actually have an in depth knowledge of the book as much as a pop-culture impression. However, it should noted that many fascists during the 19th and 20th centuries were mostly inspired by this work, as many fascist dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini often kept a copy of this work, the later even wrote a these relating to this work.[[/note]]

to:

Written by Italian statesman Creator/NiccoloMachiavelli in 1513, ''The Prince'' (''Il Principe'') is the single most famous political treatise and the first entirely secular work of UsefulNotes/TheRenaissance. At the time it was first published, ''The Prince'' was seen as extremely scandalous for its endorsement of ruthlessness and amorality. Nevertheless, it quickly became popular with politicians and remains highly influential in Western politics today. If there's any MagnificentBastard in ''anything'' set after the Renaissance, it's very probable he's taken cues from this book.[[note]]Although they aren't quite as likely to actually have an in depth knowledge of the book as much as a pop-culture impression. However, it should noted that many fascists during the 19th and 20th centuries were mostly inspired by this work, as many fascist dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini often kept a copy of this work, the later even wrote a these thesis relating to this work.[[/note]]
8th May '18 7:28:32 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Written by Italian statesman Creator/NiccoloMachiavelli in 1513, ''The Prince'' (''Il Principe'') is the single most famous political treatise and the first entirely secular work of UsefulNotes/TheRenaissance. At the time it was first published, ''The Prince'' was seen as extremely scandalous for its endorsement of ruthlessness and amorality. Nevertheless, it quickly became popular with politicians and remains highly influential in Western politics today. If there's any MagnificentBastard in ''anything'' set after the Renaissance, it's very probable he's taken cues from this book.[[note]]Although they aren't quite as likely to actually have an in depth knowledge of the book as much as a pop-culture impression.[[/note]]

to:

Written by Italian statesman Creator/NiccoloMachiavelli in 1513, ''The Prince'' (''Il Principe'') is the single most famous political treatise and the first entirely secular work of UsefulNotes/TheRenaissance. At the time it was first published, ''The Prince'' was seen as extremely scandalous for its endorsement of ruthlessness and amorality. Nevertheless, it quickly became popular with politicians and remains highly influential in Western politics today. If there's any MagnificentBastard in ''anything'' set after the Renaissance, it's very probable he's taken cues from this book.[[note]]Although they aren't quite as likely to actually have an in depth knowledge of the book as much as a pop-culture impression. However, it should noted that many fascists during the 19th and 20th centuries were mostly inspired by this work, as many fascist dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini often kept a copy of this work, the later even wrote a these relating to this work.[[/note]]
8th May '18 7:21:54 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message
2nd May '18 9:11:52 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


As of note, "Prince" (or "principe" in the original Italian) at the time just meant "ruler", more or less (from Latin "princeps" = "first one"). [[IThoughtItMeant It didn't mean "the son of a king"]]. If there was only one person in the state who really mattered, it was called a monarchy. Even a democratically elected president would have still been called a "Principe".

to:

As of note, "Prince" (or "principe" in the original Italian) at the time just meant "ruler", more or less (from Latin "princeps" = "first one"). [[IThoughtItMeant [[JustForFun/IThoughtItMeant It didn't mean "the son of a king"]]. If there was only one person in the state who really mattered, it was called a monarchy. Even a democratically elected president would have still been called a "Principe".
2nd Jan '18 2:37:07 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message
2nd Jan '18 2:31:04 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* WithUsOrAgainstUs: This is trope, along with NeutralityBacklash, is one of the reasons why the prince should avoid a "neutral" position. In times to conflicts between warring states, the Prince should at least form an alliance with a faction to gain trust from themm and even if the prince loses, the prince at least lose together with an ally.

to:

* WithUsOrAgainstUs: This is trope, along with NeutralityBacklash, is one of the reasons why the prince should avoid a "neutral" position. In times to conflicts between warring states, the Prince should at least form an alliance with a faction to gain trust from themm them and even if the prince loses, the prince at least lose together with an ally.
2nd Jan '18 2:30:06 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* WithUsOrAgainstUs: This is trope, along with NeutralityBackfire, is one of the reasons why the prince should avoid a "neutral" position. In times to conflicts between warring states, the Prince should at least form an alliance with a faction to gain trust from them.

to:

* WithUsOrAgainstUs: This is trope, along with NeutralityBackfire, NeutralityBacklash, is one of the reasons why the prince should avoid a "neutral" position. In times to conflicts between warring states, the Prince should at least form an alliance with a faction to gain trust from them.themm and even if the prince loses, the prince at least lose together with an ally.
2nd Jan '18 2:29:04 PM DarkPaladinX
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* ThePowerOfHate: The book advises the prince that if the prince should rule his kingdom through fear, the prince should avoid this trope, as ruling the kingdom with hatred will give your subjects enough justification of overthrowing the prince.


Added DiffLines:

* WithUsOrAgainstUs: This is trope, along with NeutralityBackfire, is one of the reasons why the prince should avoid a "neutral" position. In times to conflicts between warring states, the Prince should at least form an alliance with a faction to gain trust from them.
29th Nov '17 11:50:28 AM ImperialMajestyXO
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* TheDreaded: The book famously claims that a ruler is safer in his position feared than loved, if he cannot be both. Being an object of fear, therefore, is a good way of preserving power. However, a ruler must nevertheless ensure that he is not hated, because hatred can overcome fear.



%%* JerkJustifications

to:

%%* JerkJustifications* JerkJustifications: Machiavelli justifies the sometimes brutal measures he advocates by claiming that rulers have to be ruthless in order to maintain their power. That being said, however, he states that a ruler should be a pragmatist willing to cross lines if doing so would be in his own interest, rather than a puppy-kicking psycho who commits atrocities because he enjoys it.
This list shows the last 10 events of 149. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Literature.ThePrince