Machiavelli is everywhere
Since reading all that Machiavelli for class, I seem to see things that relate to our readings everywhere I look. For example, in the book Propaganda by Jacques Ellul:
“But the people were given the immense satisfaction of having been consulted, of having been given a chance to debate, of having - so it seemed to them - their opinions solicited and weighed. (131)”
ProfPTJ pointed out, at the beginning of the semester, that rarely are ideas or philosophies new. In this section of the text, Ellul seems to be describing an event similar to Mach’s allowance of populace accusation (Mach, 102). Ellul is referring to mid-twentieth century Soviet government, wherein the populace was “fed” comfortable chunks of political opinion which they would regurgitate when given the opportunity to participate in government. He points out that this was beneficial to both the government (who got everything they wanted) and the populace (who didn’t have to spend too much time formulating opinions). On a side note, Ellul referenced part of the above quote to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda director under Hitler.
It seems to me that this snippet of analysis is in fact reflecting a way in which Mach’s ideas, in both The Prince and The Discourses, have been applied. Although they were both written with different intent and both support differing forms of government, it seems that these governments used the Going-to-extremes-to-keep-power sentiment of The Prince but maintained a Keep-everybody-happy-and-a-willing-army-at-hand public attitude (of The Discourses). Though Mach was pro-Republic and anti-Principality (poor Sparta and Venice got the short straw every time he mentioned them), it seems that, by combining these seemingly different (not opposing) forms of rule and government structure/priority/ethic, one might make a rather successful totalitarian rule (until the rest of the world decided you were violating ALL forms of human rights…)
“But the people were given the immense satisfaction of having been consulted, of having been given a chance to debate, of having - so it seemed to them - their opinions solicited and weighed. (131)”
ProfPTJ pointed out, at the beginning of the semester, that rarely are ideas or philosophies new. In this section of the text, Ellul seems to be describing an event similar to Mach’s allowance of populace accusation (Mach, 102). Ellul is referring to mid-twentieth century Soviet government, wherein the populace was “fed” comfortable chunks of political opinion which they would regurgitate when given the opportunity to participate in government. He points out that this was beneficial to both the government (who got everything they wanted) and the populace (who didn’t have to spend too much time formulating opinions). On a side note, Ellul referenced part of the above quote to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda director under Hitler.
It seems to me that this snippet of analysis is in fact reflecting a way in which Mach’s ideas, in both The Prince and The Discourses, have been applied. Although they were both written with different intent and both support differing forms of government, it seems that these governments used the Going-to-extremes-to-keep-power sentiment of The Prince but maintained a Keep-everybody-happy-and-a-willing-army-at-hand public attitude (of The Discourses). Though Mach was pro-Republic and anti-Principality (poor Sparta and Venice got the short straw every time he mentioned them), it seems that, by combining these seemingly different (not opposing) forms of rule and government structure/priority/ethic, one might make a rather successful totalitarian rule (until the rest of the world decided you were violating ALL forms of human rights…)
posted by Rebecca at 1:42 PM
<< Home