[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 9 KB, 177x284, antimac.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16298697 No.16298697 [Reply] [Original]

>It is not only his violence; he shows utter contempt for the people that he rules, and treats them like animals: the usurper will sacrifice, both all the goods of "his" people and their very lives, to appease his tyrant's whims and avarice. There are only three legitimate ways to become Master of a country: succession; choice of the people which have the capacity; or conquest as a result of war. It should be clear as to which manner Machiavelli covertly recommends.

>The fifteenth century, where Machiavelli lived, was one where cruelty was normal; then, the disastrous glory of the conquerans was preferred, and these striking actions which by their size, impose a certain respect. Now, gentleness and fairness win respect and is considered good statecraft; I see that people prefer a humane ruler to one with the qualities of a conqueror, both bad and good. The insanity which praised and therefore encouraged the cruel passions, which caused the upheaval of the world, is gone.

>I ask: what can sustain a man that seeks power for the sake of power? And what incentives can such a man, intent on raising his own power on the misery and the destruction of other men, offer others? How can these others believe that the misery will only be suffered by only the "losers"?

Machiavellians btfo

>> No.16298706

>>16298697
This little "refutation" is itself a Machiavellian act, you fool.

>> No.16298718

>>16298706
>b-b-but it was done in bad faith
Nice try. You can't gas light this conversation with your machiavel trickery.

>> No.16298728

>>16298718
It doesn't even need to be a conscious act. Whatever his intentions, he is signaling to his subjects and other rulers that
>guys i swear im not like those dirty machiavellians at all!!! im different see here is my proof

>> No.16298756
File: 154 KB, 729x638, pepe_apustaja_magnifying_glass_sherlock.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16298756

>>16298697
Did this guy even read Machiavelli?? Is this myopic view based off his own biases?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaORhYKBFZU

>> No.16298778

>>16298697
>>16298756
Great. From Buddha vs Shankara shitposting /lit/ now moved on to Machiavelli vs Fredrick the Great. Can't wait to see your next advances.

>> No.16298832
File: 101 KB, 641x1200, phenotypes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16298832

>>16298728
Red pill me on Frederick the Great's phenotype, machiavel scum.

>> No.16298853

>>16298832
Based.

Imagine unironically having someone like Frederick as your king.

>> No.16298869

>>16298832
It's hard to tell from the painting, but seems like
>low conscientiousness
>low extraversion
>high openness
>high neuroticism
>high narcissism
>high machiavellianism
>high psychopathy
Your point?

>> No.16298875

>>16298697
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN2p3NgqWos

>> No.16298885

>>16298869
>Your point?
I'm saying that Frederick the Great wasn't an intuitive Machiavel based off of his phenotype, which may have subconsciously contributed to his paradoxical Machiavelli anti-Machiavellian argument.

>> No.16298897

>>16298885
Sure, I don't disagree. He might as well have meant what he said, but that doesn't change the fact that his counter-argument is itself a Machiavellian act, as you seem to agree.

>> No.16298919

>>16298897
I think you're losing the basis of his argument. Frederick the Based, is attempting to dissuade newcomers to the book from pursuing the political realm that will eventually backfire on them as many have previously experienced, even if a portion of a Machiavellian argument is to obfuscate any learnings from newcomers.

>> No.16298944

>>16298919
Again, I don't disagree. His intentions might have been multi-faceted, though he is certainly acting in a Machiavellian manner at least in part.

>> No.16299929
File: 119 KB, 1080x1080, 1528231217085.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16299929

>>16298697
Has this faggot even read the book? Machiavelli never tells you to abuse the people, nor does he treat them as cattle. He simply posits how a ruler could maintain power and use it to strengthen his country. There are examples of how being too passive or too cruel can come to bite you in the ass.
>There are only three legitimate ways to become Master of a country: succession; choice of the people which have the capacity; or conquest as a result of war. It should be clear as to which manner Machiavelli covertly recommends.
Oh, I get it. He's a bitter successionfag.
>nooooo people be gud u have to be gud
>war baaaaaaad
>except the war that made my family the rulers
>because we gud
>and we look out for u
Christ... Why are Krauts like this?