/lit/ - Literature

Because idiots can read too

>>17008790
It take the big smart words and make them small so people like OP can understand them

>I count religion but a childish toy,/And hold there is no sin but ignorance.

catholic breeders and isis drone meat btfo

>>17008790
have you experienced first-hand more than him in politics?
if not, then his philosophy is inherently better than yours when it comes to politics, no?
experience more than he did, then write your own work

>>17008790
I think it has more to do with historical relevance. No one wants to read The Discourses for some reason though

>>17008790
satire

pretty sure it was important in the history of philosophy because it formed part of the shift from theology to ethics/politics

>>17008790
Because he's a great writer

>>17008992
>b-but m-muh experience-
Haha, NOPE. Fuck that guy, I've read hundreds of books ranging from fantasy to philosophy, watched, read, and pondered on many different characters and real-life personalities, the pattern of their lives, their patterns of behavior. I harbor far greater understanding than he's ever possesed. That KEK was limited to the views of his comfy little european court lifestyle, which might have served him well back then, but is beyond useless nowadays.

But say he's got a pearl of wisdom or two in that book of his—who knows, I haven't read it—and I can still apply it today, instead of using his advise and personality as a model for what a certain kind of individual would have behaved like under a different society (not really useful save for an ongoing mental construct of human behavior at large). I am still better than him. I am happier than him, more important than him, a greater, far more powerful soul than him, just by virtue of being myself. So it's not up to ME to beg this corpse's book for insight, I'm not gonna get on my knees and negotiate for how to absorb this withered skeleton's almighty advice. Just like with every other kind of literature, I'm gonna rip out the bits that are worthwhile and throw away the fluff. You are a KEK if you believe otherwise.

>>17009134
Right. Not ignorance but arrogance is bliss.

>>17009134
The /lit/ version of the navy seal copypasta?

>>17009134
Cope

he is an idiot, read this if you know Portuguese, it is a story of Machiavelli's interpretations over the centuries

>>17009155
Not arrogance, but confidence. I'm not about to undersell myself just so I can feel wise and enlightened. I hate retards like you who think it's fine to spend your entire life "preparing" because, somehow, you'll never end up ready enough. When the hell does "arrogance" turn into "wisdom", an arbitrary period of years? You make excuse after excuse for why you need to stay passive, and all it amounts to are justifications for being afraid of failure. You and the other anons can think me arrogant while I learn and employ more than you wisened sages will ever learn feeling sorry for yourselves.

>>17008790

https://fliphtml5.com/qhhw/uhji/basic

here's an actual answer if you want one

>>17009134
if you haven't written the modern equivalent of machiavelli, as low a bar as that may be, you probably wouldn't have the wisdom of machiavelli if you were alive in his time, i.e. you would probably have been a pigfucker, like you are now. so go easy on old, seemingly out-dated thinkers, they would probably be smarter than you if they were alive today

>>17009274
Pardon? I was agreeing with you. That you weren't 'prepared' to get that's kind of funny. Whence this need to justify yourself? You type and probably talk too much as well, faggot.

>>17009328
Lol seething

>>17008992
Primo, retarded argument, you can dispel any book on practical matter.
Secundo, the prince is not a philosophy book.
Tertio, i never opposed my ideas to Machiavelli's one.

>>17009134
Kek, saved.

>>17009357
yol
>yawn

Because like most popular work, it's satire that retarded brainlets think is earnest

>>17009634
>y-you said l-lol
Embarrasing.

Bump

>>17009643
idiot

>>17008790
Immense popularity amongst the European courtier/political class. Every courtier in Europe read it and Discourses on Livy. It directly caused the German Princes to create state Protestantism and Henry VIII Anglicanism, making his work of world historic importance.

Remember the ending of The Prince: grab Lady Luck and fuck her senseless.

>>17009039
The Prince is a pamphlet, Discourses on Livy is a book. Everyone with half a brain should read DoL too.

>>17012087
>Remember the ending of The Prince: grab Lady Luck and fuck her senseless.
What do you mean?
I thought virtù and fortune played equal parts.

>>17008790
The importance of the work has little to do with the quality of the work so much as it has historical significance in classic arguments about government. Machiavelli represents a departure from both classical political philosophy, christian political philosophy, and the political philosophy of his contemporaries. There was debate at the time was surrounding the two concepts of 'honestas' and 'utilitas'—that is, honour/honesty/morality and expediency/utility. The conventional wisdom, inherited from Cicero, was that in political rule, honestas is utilitas. By acting honestly, honourable, and morally, you promote the utility of your dominion and people. This is typified by the writings of Erasmus and More, but has long been the orthodoxy of both the classical era (Plato, Aristotle, Cicero) and Christian era. Machiavelli is the first since perhaps Thucydides (in western political thought anyway, Legalism and Chanakya approach similar themes) to challenge this dynamic, focusing instead on utilitas. In fact, he goes even further and completely inverts the relationship, suggesting not that honestas is utilitas, but that utilitas is honestas. That is, acting in accordance to political expediency is what is good and honourable—and above all, truly honest—for a prince to do. Which is why Machiavelli's virtù focuses around those traits which will bring stability, autonomy, and power to a city or state, a far cry from those traditionally attributed with honestas (mostly referring to the Seven Virtues).
In accordance with classical republican theory, for Machiavelli the most important character of any republic is its autonomy and self-direction, what we might calls sovereignty. In the turmoil and torment of Renaissance Italy, cities and territories were frequently changing hands, factionalism and revolt were rife, and major foreign powers were vying for influence. In such, virtue consisted mostly in securing the autonomy of the state. And indeed, the focus on civic virtue in the Discourses is focused to this end as well, though offers different proscriptions. So what the Prince demonstrates is how utilitas—not honestas—will bring about the autonomy and peace of a state, through the accumulation of power and the elimination of civil discord. It is in this sense that utilitas is honestas, the virtù necessary to guarantee the political autonomy is what is good and moral for a Prince to do. Which we the culmination of at the end of the Prince with Machiavelli making a plea to Medici to seize the opportunity to form an autonomous Italy.
This break from morality and politics prefaced and influenced thinkers like Hobbes, Mandeville, and Smith, who likewise overturned the classical conception of political good and ushered in a new era of politics and economics. So even though the Prince itself is not very philosophically rigorous or impressive, what it represents and its influence earn it a deserving spot as a great political reference.

>>17012830
Lol didn't read try writing three sentences or less next time chum

Dismissing Machiavelli is the single biggest midwit thing you can do tbqh familia.

>>17009134
A post whose poster is in need of physical discipline for thinking that posting such a stupid statement was a good idea.

>>17012830
>>17013029
this

>>17012830
OP here, i made this thread so polemical to attract more anons, shitpost a bit and see everyone's thought on it.

I'm glad to find such an excellent and complete answer, that contextualized everything, brought to light the answer to my core question and made me learn many things on both political theory and philosophy as a science and as an object.

I'm not memeing or being ironic, it is an excellent post and i'm glad you posted it in my thread anon. Thanks.

>>17012830
Rare posts like these are why I keep coming to /lit/

>>17012114
Fortuna, like any woman, prefers the men who makes aggressive moves. Grab, slap, and thrust:

>Chapter 25, The Prince:
To conclude then: fortune varies but men go on regardless. When their approach suits the times they’re successful, and when it doesn’t they’re not. My opinion on the matter is this: it’s better to be impulsive than cautious; fortune is female and if you want to stay on top of her you have to slap and thrust. You’ll see she’s more likely to yield that way than to men who go about her coldly. And being a woman she likes her men young, because they’re not so cagey, they’re wilder and moredaring when they master her.

>>17012830
Don't underestimate the direct importance of Machiavelli in causing the Protestant reformation and the Anglican supremacy. No one would have thought prior to Machiavelli of creating a new religon despite regular schisms afflicting Europe and the Church almost every generation. Almost as soon as Machiavelli praises founding a new religion to cement a new rulership half of Europe follows his advice and does so.

>>17012830
A good post? On my /lit/?
It's more common than you think

chosen fodder of middle managers trying to climb the corporate ladder

>>17009039
>>17012097
How much prior knowledge of italy do I need for DoL? Seems like it's what I expected The Prince to be.

I went into Prince looking for muh political powerplay manual but was disappointed by platitudes and that it referenced a bunch of obscure external stuff. Like 'in situations like X, remember what [random italian] did' with no further explanation.

>>17014156
Read Livy. That is what it is a discourse on. But don't expect muh political powerplay from it.

>>17009134
>who knows, I haven't read it
then shut up

>>17012830
Please die, fucking avatarfag.

>>17008790
This was half a job application and half praising how great Cesare Borgia was for what he did. It is clear in his letters he held great respect for Borgia and what he did which is what he based most of 'The Prince' on.

>>17014478
Make better posts.

>>17008790
Because Mussolini liked it.

>>17012830
He represents a written departure but I don't think the importance is as large as you suggest. There were cruel and pragmatic leaders long before Machiavelli wrote this particular guidebook. He happened to be a utiliatrian pragmatic thinker himself and he clearly seems to suffer some sort of proto-patriotic fervor in his offering, which makes it unique as an exposure of these concepts, not necessarily their originator. I don't know if it actually made the rounds very much in his own time.

>>17009134
>—who knows, I haven't read it—
kek

>>17012830
wasn't legalism before thucydides?

>>17014409
>Me, thinking DoL was about the politics of an obscure italian place called Livy
>Look it up
>Livy is an author
>who wrote about Rome

When 4chan disappears, it will be a net-positive in my life except losing this board. Also, I never thought to google 'Livy', content in my assumption, and am faced now with the fact that I am a brainlet.

Where is that Machiavelli Jung guy?

>>17009043
>>17009643
where did this meme come from?

>>17016601
Your ass

>>17009134
Is this bait?

>>17009134
what is this mental illness called lads

>>17016601
Rousseau I think

>>17012087
>Remember the ending of The Prince: grab Lady Luck and fuck her senseless.

you said it chief

>>17012830
i kneel satsuki

>>17014619
why Machiavielli didn´t ask Borgia to become a conqueror and unify italy?

>>17016601
>The Prince is satire
>politics in The Republic are a metaphor
any more like this?

>>17019309
The latter is explicitly stated by Socrates in the dialogue though. I guess Hegel being a Prussian shill in Philosophy of Right is another example.

>>17012087
>Remember the ending of The Prince: grab Lady Luck and fuck her senseless.

>>17013029
Moldbug is a midwit though

>>17019703
>The latter is explicitly stated by Socrates in the dialogue though
Socrates also says he has a daimon inside of him and that he heard stories about heaven. Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics takes Plato's ideas about raising children literally as well. But it becomes most abundantly clear that it wasn't a mere metaphor from the involvement of Plato and Dion in Syracuse. I'm not saying it's not a metaphor, but it's also a political treatise.

>>17009134
unequivocally based, Machiavelli BTFO!

>>17020177
Carpe Diem may suit you better if eroticism causes you to jump to your react folder.

>>17020873
not the same anon but i always thought that the republic was mental experiment or a thinking excercise that socrates and his friends did when the nature of justice came while they were discussing stuff, so that topic of discussion grew out organically, unless of course it was Plato´s way to input his own thoughts about what the perfect society might be

>>17020873
Aren't the letters of dubious authenticity? I agree that it isn't completely a metaphor, but clearly much of it is.

>>17019196
>if you want to stay on top of her you have to slap and thrust

>>17009231
Olavete no /pinto/ é foda, amigo.

>>17009134
>Tl;dr: who knows, I haven't read it

>>17020986
I haven't read the letters or Laws which is why I didn't mention them. I mainly based my opinion on Plutarch's lives of Dion and Timoleon. I'm also struggling to see the metaphoric relevance of the role of women and children in society, which Aristotle didn't either as it seems

>>17021161
Those were the parts that I thought weren't metaphors.

>>17012830
>anime picture
>wall of text
not reading that

>>17021161
Xenophon writes more on women in the Oeconomicus and smaller works. Spartaphiles like Socrates circle had a greater role for women modelled on Sparta, Aristotle writing after the defeat of Sparta looked down upon Spartan feminism, mocking that for all their training and autonomy they didn't take up arms to defend their homeland and ran away like Athenian loom girls.

>>17021763
You should, it's a good post. Two paragraphs with a line break isn't a wall of text you ADHD zoomtard.

>>17021763
Everyone before was like ted stark or whatever and everyone after was like the dragon lady. Do you get it anon?

>>17008790
It is interesting because it offered an ethical framework that is outside of christian morality. Few authors at that time did this in europe. Nietzsche liked him for that reason. This is basically why he is historically important

>>17012830

good post, thanks lad

>>17016601
People read his Discourses on Livy and him gushing over Republican government and assume he must have been trying to like sabotage the prince or something. It’s fucking stupid, a person can separate their preferred government from what they live under

>>17013025
>>17014478
>>17021763
>noo don't post a thorough and insightful answer to OP's question

>>17022479
Machiavelli gives advice on how Savonarola could have succeeded establishing theocratic state (hint: raise an army/militia like Moses to control the mob when it turns against you). He's a republican because he argues it's the best state to pursue virtu, a monarchy can not survive two bad kings while a republic can replace them with competant ones who naturally rise to the top when the opportunity to rule exists. He's a practical republican, not an axiomatic one. Any form of state can be lead well by following his advice, it just that a republic is more likely to be able to do so.

>>17022370
This. Machiavelli was like Voldemort in that people wouldn't even say his name when referring to him they were so mad

>>17023122
>Machiavelli was like Voldemort

He's the first modern thinker. The things he said seem like platitudes now because we live in the modernity, but there really is nobody before Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes, etc. who saw things like they did, but his view was restricted to politics so he's not as obvious of a candidate for the the first modern philosopher as they are.
He invented the notion of verita effetuale, or effectual truth (a phrase never used before him) but which is essentially the epistemological basis of modern science spelled out further by Bacon. Surely you have heard philosophy criticized for being "useless", but before modernity there was no expectation for natural philosophy to be useful, or to prove itself true by being useful, the Aristotelian and Platonist way of looking at things was so convinced of knowledge being and end in-itself and was so influential people didn't think the discovery of truth had to have a practical purpose. The scientific revolution changed that, but Machiavelli spoke of this notion in politics very prophetically to what was to follow in the modern age.
He criticized previous political philosophers (Plato, Aristotle, Augustine) for inventing imaginary republics to discover the ideal of justice, saying that since these could never be realized - if there was any truth, it was ineffectual - they were irrelevant to actual politics, and so political philosophy had to focus on the effectual truth. He explicitly laid down the principle that philosophers should study how things are, not how they ought to be. All of the social sciences today - economics, sociology, political science, etc. have this orientation. Machiavelli initiated this.
There's a lot more to him than meets the eye, he's actually pretty cryptic.
Last thing: he more or less openly had a distaste for Christian morality and longed for a return to the classical world of martial honor. He saw more value in the visible world of the senses than in the invisible world of the afterlife. This was a very rebellious view at the time to explicitly endorse, but it won over.

>>17024227
interesting. you a straussian?