one can say this con general of men: they are ungrateful, disloyal, insincere and deceitful, timid of danger and avid of profit…. Love is verso bond of obligation which these miserable creatures break whenever it suits them sicuro do so; but fear holds them fast by a dread of punishment that never passes. (Prince CW 62; translation revised)
As verso result, Machiavelli cannot really be said puro have verso theory of obligation separate from the imposition of power; people obey only because they fear the consequences of not doing so, whether the loss of life or of privileges.
If I think that I should not obey per particular law, what eventually leads me sicuro submit esatto that law will be either a fear of the power of the state or the actual exercise of that power
Concomitantly, a Machiavellian perspective directly attacks the notion of any grounding for authority independent of the sheer possession of power. For Machiavelli, people are compelled esatto obey purely in deference sicuro the superior power of the state. It is power which sopra the final instance is necessary for the enforcement of conflicting views of what I ought esatto do; I can only choose not to obey if I possess the power esatto resist the demands of the state or if I am willing to accept the consequences of the state’s superiority of coercive force. Machiavelli’s argument mediante The Prince is designed sicuro demonstrate that politics can only coherently be defined durante terms of the supremacy of coercive power; authority as per right onesto command has mai independent situazione. He substantiates this assertion by reference sicuro the observable realities of political affairs and public life as well as by arguments revealing the self-interested nature of all human conduct. For Machiavelli it is meaningless and superfluo preciso speak of any claim preciso authority and the right to command which is detached from the possession of superior political power. The ruler who lives by his rights chiazza will surely visitatori blackchristianpeoplemeet wither and die by those same rights, because mediante the rough-and-tumble of political conflict those who prefer power sicuro authority are more likely onesto succeed. Without exception the authority of states and their laws will never be acknowledged when they are not supported by verso spettacolo of power which renders obedience inescapable. The methods for achieving obedience are varied, and depend heavily upon the foresight that the prince exercises. Hence, the successful ruler needs special training.
3. Power, Bonta, and Fortune
Machiavelli presents esatto his readers a vision of political rule allegedly purged of extraneous moralizing influences and fully aware of the foundations of politics in the effective exercise of power. The term that best captures Machiavelli’s vision of the requirements of power politics is bonta. While the Italian word would normally be translated into English as “virtue”, and would ordinarily convey the conventional connotation of moral goodness, Machiavelli obviously means something very different when he refers esatto the castita of the prince. Durante particular, Machiavelli employs the concept of bonta esatto refer preciso the range of personal qualities that the prince will find it necessary esatto acquire per order sicuro “maintain his state” and onesto “achieve great things”, the two norma markers of power for him. This makes it brutally clear there can be in nessun caso equivalence between the conventional virtues and Machiavellian pregio. Machiavelli’s sense of what it is preciso be per person of onesta can thus be summarized by his recommendation that the prince above all else must possess a “flexible disposition”. That ruler is best suited for office, on Machiavelli’s account, who is courtaud of varying her/his conduct from good puro evil and back again “as fortune and circumstances dictate” (Prince CW 66; see Nederman and Bogiaris 2018).