Chapter III
In the third chapter of Machiavelli's book, The Prince, we are confronted with more ideas and proposals put forth by Niccolo Machiavelli, in his book dedicated to Lorenzo de’ Medici who would become duke of Urbino in 1516.
This chapter was a rather long one, so I picked out several ideas to focus on.
Machiavelli first proposes this: "Men change masters willingly, hoping to better themselves, and this belief makes them take arms against their rulers; in which they are deceived, as experience proves they had gone from bad to worse."
What Machiavelli is saying is that when men take up arms against their governments, and seek to better themselves by establishing a new one, they are deceived, and they go from bad to worse. History tells us that this is a blatant lie. Liberty is always better than tyranny, and freedom better than slavery. If men must take up arms to secure their freedom, so be it. In fact, it is their duty to revolt against tyrannical governments, and establish a new government in it's place. It is every man's duty to secure the freedom of himself and his countrymen.
What is this notion that men go from bad to worse? Let us take a look at a particular revolution to see if this paradigm holds true.
Let us look at before and after the American Revolution, to see if it really does hold true.
We can notice several things before the American Revolution. Tyrannical rule, unfairly imposed taxes, and a corrupt judicial system. The king and parliament have absolute authority over the colonists, and they have no representation whatsoever. The people were oppressed, and taxed for every small service to pay for a war they didn't want (sound familiar?). In light of all this, the colonists got together and formed a group that would fight for their independence from the crown.
After the revolutionary war, the people were represented. They elected their leaders. The people were given fairer judicial systems. While taxes still had to be lowered, and there were many, many obstacles for this new nation, they would prosper in the coming century. Of course this wasn't a perfect system, but it was a lot better than before the revolution. It was fairer, more just, and more liberal. Not perfect by any standard, but much better.
Thus, I don't believe this paradigm holds true. While revolutions may never be perfect, and must establish a good government after the fact, they do, many times, lead to an end to tyranny. Not always, I'll admit. But many times, they do.
Also, I would ask whether anyone could really believe that throwing off tyranny is a deception. Liberty is no deception, it always brings freedom. Tyranny always brings oppression, and more often than not brings deception.
Another idea Machiavelli proposes is that, "After reconquering rebel territories they are not so easily lost again."
This, I would say, is true. After reconquering a rebel territory, the will of the people will be crushed. The moral of any rebel will be very low. Dissenters will be silenced, spies hanged, and leaders executed. The Prince will have learned from his first mistakes that resulted in him losing control of the state. So it is true that after a territory is reconquered, it will not be so easily lost again.
The third idea Machiavelli proposes is this, "[Annexed states] may or may not be of the same nationality and language [as their conquerors]. If they are, it is very easy to hold them, especially if they are not accustomed to freedom."
This is also true for two reasons.
Well, this concludes our analysis of chapter III. Chapter IV will be posted this soon. If you enjoyed this, upvote it! If you have a critique or suggestion, let me know in the comments. I'm active fairly often and will try to answer you as soon as I can.
Cheers friends, and remember, keep Steeming!
