A 20-something wearing a Bush/Cheney '04 button was reading Machiavelli's

[gristy]

The Prince on the subway across the aisle from me. Machiavelli wrote this book in 1513. Here's an excerpt I found on the internet:

That Which Concerns a Prince on the Subject of the Art of War
The Prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline; for this is the sole art that belongs to him who rules, and it is of such force that it not only upholds those who are born princes, but it often enables men to rise from a private station to that rank. And, on the contrary, it is seen that when princes have thought more of ease than of arms they have lost their states. And the first cause of your losing it is to neglect this art; and what enables you to acquire a state is to be master of the art. Francesco Sforza, though being martial, from a private person became Duke of Milan; and the sons, through avoiding the hardships and troubles of arms, from dukes became private persons. For among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised, and this is one of those ignominies against which a prince ought to guard himself, as is shown later on.

--------------------

So who has read this book? What conclusions might be drawn of the young man sitting across from me last night?

[King of New Orleans]

1. That he's a goober

eom

[nostamj]

2. "So who has read this book?"

it has been reported that it is Rove's favorite book.

the insipid chimp is rumored to have glanced at the Classic Comics Illustrated version

[JohnyCanuck]

3. "The Despoiling of America" explains neocon machiavelli connection

Heres's a snip from the article. See link below for the complete article. It's a bit long but has some interesting info on the the neo-cons and machiavellian type thinking. As the article also points out, the neo-cons favorite philosopher, Leo Strauss, was a fan of Machiavelli and believed that the rulers should manipulate and use religion as one way of controlling the masses.

I suspect that most Americans have never heard of Machiavelli, nevertheless, it should be no surprise to us that Machiavelli has been accepted, praised, and followed by the Neo-Conservatives in the White House and his precepts are blindly adopted by the so-called “Christian” Dominionists. Kevin Phillips tells us in his masterful book, American Dynasty that Karl Rove, political strategist for President George W. Bush, is a devotee of Machiavelli, just as Rove’s predecessor, Lee Atwater had been for the elder Bush.<26> In fact, there has been an incredible effort to dilute the immoral implications of Machiavelli’s teachings. Today’s best apologist for Machiavelli is one of the most influential voices in Washington with direct connections into the oval office.

Michael A. Ledeen was a Senior Fellow with the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a counselor to the National Security Council and special counselor to former Secretary of State, Alexander Haig in 1985. His relationship with Pat Robertson goes back at least to the early 1980’s.<27> Like Robertson, Ledeen was an advocate for military intervention in Nicaragua and for assistance to the Contras. (Ledeen was also involved in the Iran-Contra affair.)<28>

Today, in 2004, Michael Ledeen is a fellow at the conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute and according to William O. Beeman of the Pacific News Service, “Ledeen has become the driving philosophical force behind the neoconservative movement and the military actions it has spawned.

<snip>

In fact, Ledeen’s influence goes even further. The BBC, the Washington Post and Jim Lobe writing for the Asia Times report that Michael Ledeen is the only full-time international affairs analyst consulted by Karl Rove.<34> Ledeen has regular conversations with Rove. The Washington Post said, “More than once, Ledeen has seen his ideas faxed to Rove, become official policy or rhetoric.”<35>


www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5646.htm

[Droopy]

4. I read it several years ago for a college class

I can't remember it totally, but the main point was that the author was giving advice to would be leaders on how to run their states and control their subjects. It is a very cynical book that is still relevant in today's political climate.

I'd say the young man sitting across from you was either reading it for a college class or thought that The Prince was a valuable tool for gaining insight into the administration, which it is. He could also be planning to be a Republican politician one day and was reading up on how to gain the reigns of power to the most powerful country in the world.

[Jack Rabbit]

5. I've read it

I wouldn't draw any hard conclusions from the fact that a Bush supporter was reading Machiavelli.

Given that all at DU should be familiar with my convictions by now, what conclusion should one draw from the fact that I've read The Prince?

[DS1]

6. I hate it when people call war an 'art'

[AG78]

10. But by any other name...

it wouldn't be as sweet.

As The Police once wrote:

But you can reach the top of your profession
If you become the leader of the land
For murder is the sport of the elected
And you don't need to lift a finger of your hand

War is, was, and always will be a business. That's the problem. It never gets us anywhere. Last time I checked, the outcome of every war ever has resulted in the world in which we live in today. It never solves a problem, it simply causes new ones. What happened after we defeated fascism in Germany with the help of the Soviet Union? We ended up in a world wide 50 year war with the Soviet Union, which came thisclose to nuclear annihilation.

And we're developing new technologies every day that will kill more efficiently. It's an art. It's a business. And large corporations don't invest as much money into these technologies without the expectation that they will one day be used.

[BlackVelvetElvis]

7. He could be a student

This book is a classic. For many history and political science students, it is required reading.
The whole point of the book is how to gain power and hold onto it. Machiavelli studied past leaders, collected empirical evidence and this book is the result.

[Bandit]

8. Doesn't Bush*'s favorite Philosopher say the same thing?

War is good. Strong leaders are that way because of war. Yep I'm sure that is what Bush*'s favorite Philosopher said time and time again.

[Redleg]

9. I read the book for a political theory class in college.

The guy is just some young, dumb and full of ______ Republican, probably a lot like I was back in my younger days. I did never wear a Reagan-Bush pin.

[HawkerHurricane]

11. I wouldn't read too much into it...

The Prince (which probably wasn't written my Machiavelli, but...) is a 'How to run a state in Italy' book and considered a classic in manipulative politics. Read by history and PoliSci majors, and the wannabes, it includes such wonderful advice as 'execute your enemies, but don't bankrupt them. The sons of the man you execute will forgive you for murdering thier father, but will never forgive you for impoverishing them'. A lot of people read it; few get the point.

[JNelson6563]

12. I have read this book and believe

not nearly enough Democrats have.

Read it and know why Team Bush was called the Mayberry Machiavellis. If you read it you'll also know better teh strategies Rove employs. He's a Machiavelli fan but lacks a bit of the sophistication~~hence the Mayberry.

Julie

[UTUSN]

13. It Is Definitely Connected to ROVE

"American Dynasty" cites it in its Index pp 147-48, 320, 321, 327, 329-30, 329-30.

p. 147-8: "Rove was a great reader of Machiavelli, who was quoted as follows: 'The great majority of mankind is satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities.' In fact, Machiavelli was even harsher, calling deception and disguise essential to rulers. In The P{rince, hismost famous work, he lauded the success and effectiveness of the Borgia pope Alexander VI, 'who did nothing else but deceive men.' ....because 'everybody sees what you appear to be, few feel what you are,' a ruler can ignore the mob and devote himself to the interest of the ruling class, gulling the inert majority who constitute the ruled. .... identified him (Poppy) ...as 'remorselessly deceitful when it served his purpose.' ....Rove, a friend, later recalled Atwater's saying that he reread The Prince every year.' ...."

Not read much into it?----------I think NOT (meaning, YES read something into it). But the upside (sic) is that the wingnut twerp might someday "turn" for whatever cynical reason.

[MAlibdem]

14. i tried to read it...

it's not very long, but it reads like a manual.

boring as shit

[Postman]

15. Machiavelli: don't ask why, just do what you're told.

ends justify the means.

[smirkymonkey]

17. It seems to me that only a megalomaniacal

brain-dead idiot would follow that advice. Kind of like........umm...oh, our PRETZELDENT!

God, save us from right-wing, pseudo-intellectuals!

As for the kid on the train, he'll be singing a new tune once the government sends his ass over to fight a pointless war in yet another "brown" country.

[bluestateguy]

16. What conclusions?

That he BETTER not use any bullshit excuses to weasel out of the draft next year if his president is reselected.

[Faygo Kid]

18. A Bush-Cheney supporter can read??!!??

And an intelligent tract, at that? Excuse me. Need my nitro pills for the ol' heart condition here.

[Tom Kitten]

19. Required reading in Western Civ for me...

...I found the book fascinating, it's a real primer for understanding the tactics of despotism...He explains cutthroat politics, the acquisition, use, and expansion of power in a nutshell... Some people think it is a satire, but it is still as relevant today as it was 500 years ago...

As for your 20-something fellow subway rider, looks like he might be boning up for a job interview with the RNC!

[kodi]

20. Machiavelli needs to be read in context, without that he'll get it wrong

Machiavelli was no mere cold hearted realist, even though most who have heard of him without reading his works think so.

he upheld the the ideal of the strong and wise prince who assumes responsibility as he takes power, who protects his subjects against themselves and considers it a duty to use all possible measures for the preservation of law and order.

it should be noted that in several of his more pious passages he presented religious faith as a constructive force in government.

Machiavelli proposed that man's susceptibility to religion should be encouraged as a way to prevent the disintegration of the state regardless of it being a republic or autocracy.

he even lauded republicanism, but thought it impractical for his times in Italy.

he was a patriot who was willing to sacrifice his principles for Italian unity and peace, which for practical reasons and under existing circumstances seemed to him to require absolute control of the state by the princes of the 15th century Italian cities.

for shear political realism, that which today is called "Machiavellian" unencumbered by deference to ethical principles, look to the writings of his contemporary, Francesco Guicciardini.

it was Guicciardini who better posed that human character was low, and that self interest was the chief motive of people and the quest for power the primary impulse of nations.

he also wrote a commentary on Machiavelli's "Discourses" that showed more succinctly than Machiavelli the realist thought of 15th century italy....disunity, civic unrest, and private demoralization.

compared to Guicciardini, Machiavelli was a liberal pragmatist.

as to the youngster reading "The Prince," without understanding the contextual situation of Machiavelli's times, the kid will be filled with bullshit ideas of a mutant sort of Will to Power by autocrats unintended by Machiavelli, but found in Guiccardini.