Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, lived and wrote about his "Politics" discourse around 350. while Machiavelli in Florence appeared in the 1531 posthumous. Aristotle represents a well-founded position in ethics, politics and metaphysics and "has formulated the field of science by summing up what the natural scientists consider important … The creator of modern scientific terminology who has founded and categorized the various sciences existing today" (Jayasinghe 2009). This much more controversial reputation of Machiavelli can be found in the definitions of the "Machiavellian" dictionary. The shorter Oxford dictionary simply starts as the "Machiavellian" definition as a noun: "The person accepting the principles recommended by Machiavelli" and then as an adjective "Machiavelli or its principles or principles that use unscrupulous methods ambiguous, deceptive, cunning, scheming ". We rely on the fact that the latter explanation, albeit at popular intervals, is a mistaken idea of ​​Machiavelli's valid and influential contributions to political theory and practice [Machiavelli:

Though chronologically newer than Aristotle, this study speaks of Machiavelli's influence on political thinking and public administration, in particular on the contribution of the modern concept of "democratic elitism" followed by a discussion with Aristotle's contribution to the region, and its influential "political" concept as the forerunner of democratic elitism.

Recognized and followed by Machiavelli in his contribution to political theory while contributing to the principles of warfare, literature, history and diplomacy. His negative reputation is based on his first work published in 1513, but in 1532, the "Prince" posthumous. Realistic and pragmatic Machiavelli discounted the common view of political philosophers that moral goodness is the foundation of political power, which is legitimacy for the exercise of power. From the first hand to the second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, the Medici regained power in 1512, Machiavelli saw that the only real concern of a ruler was to acquire and maintain power, regardless of the moral dimension which he considered completely irrelevant

Machiavelli armed force is the only legitimizing tool and a well-established political system. Political power and legitimacy are powerful or powerful, and not always based on well-founded principles to which every citizen respects. Machiavelli is generally "ungrateful, miserable, useless and misleading, dangerous and agonizing" (Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 2005, 2009). Subjects obey the laws of the state, fear of the supremacy of the state. It relies on the self-interest of the majority of individuals who do not in practice commit themselves to moral orders unless the fear of consequences forces them to. Here we find the basis of the idealization of the Prince of Machiavelli, as opposed to the passive, neglected and ignorant "peoples".

What political thinkers called Machiavelli for "democratic elitism" (Bachrach 1967), the origin of Machiavelli is precisely the requirements of acquiring and retaining political power, although not everyone supports this view. The concept he developed was called "virtu", is not the same as English "virtue" with moral morality. Machiavelli, who held pagan beliefs, the Christian virtues of humility, grace and obedience to God's will were not the ideal, but the virtue of heroism, masculinity, character, and conquest. What Machiavelli means "virtu" means the personal attributes that the prince will acquire in order to "preserve his state" and "to reach great things", the two standard marks of power "(op cit). According to Machiavelli, the ruler has to accept a "flexible tendency" where "his behavior from good to evil is returned", as fortune and circumstances dictate "(op.cit.). Machiavelli also assumed another central concept in "Fortuna" as the irrational, malicious endangerment of state security and security. If, however, the wisdom of the virtuous and the sovereign is the same, then Fortuna can be acquired to some extent, if not completely. According to some commentators, Machiavelli says that in times of trouble, the ruler must do drastic or even violent action to restore stability. [19] Machiavelli claims the cloak of the founder of "modern" political science. contrary to Aristotle's classical standards with the vision of political science of virtue "(op.cit.). Politicians who considered Machiavelli as an ally explained the concept of" state reason "to actions that differed from the correct and incorrect codes (Viroli 1992). Machiavelli's current view is in sharp contrast to being condemned as "the devil's apostle" in the 16th century (op. Cit). However, Machiavelli never advocated evil for his own sake, but was a means of power that was neutral to traditional morality. another view expressed by Rousseau that Machiavelli was a satirical one, and only the immorality of most rulers was revealed. Machiavelli, however, favors compliance with moral virtue, and not the opposite.

Alleged "state interests" of public causes they claim it is the goodness of the state takes precedence over all other considerations, but Machiavelli himself does not support it. For him, the state was a "personal heritage", almost synonymous with "private property". Linking to the "virtuosity" concept, tailored to individual initiative, skill, talent, and dominant power, this shows that the causes of the state can not be directly attributed to Machiavelli. "Machiavelli is at best a temporary figure in the process of state language in the early modern Europe". The concept of a stable constitutional system reflecting modern political thinking (and practice) can not be seen anywhere in the concept of the princely government of Machiavelli (Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 2005, 2009).

The Republican, to which Machiavelli is the most important, discourages politics from the religious and moral order. Machiavelli is said to be the first modern writer to point out that political life was not a natural frame of God. Rather, the task of the politics was to develop order in the world. "Discourses" Machiavelli refers to the approval of the French monarchy and the government system. However, for him, this was a minimal constitutional order in which people are living safely (live safely) but not free (live free). The French government was strong and verified both the nobility and the common people's aspirations. According to Machiavelli, the purpose of the political order is the freedom created by the active participation and affirmation of nobility and people. While the common people freed the democratic foundation, the nobility decided to fit the elite. This was the basis for a more modern concept of democratic elitism.

Machiavelli acknowledged in Paris the importance of the "Parlement" laws and ordinances, which ensured the ruler and the nobility arbitrarily. However, security alone is not enough to give freedom or freedom to the whole nation. Only one Republic has its roots in both aspects of political freedom. The French Government, as it sought more security and freedom, had to define the population. Machiavelli believed that armed civil militia was the only guarantee against tyranny or external aggression. Another aspect that Machiavelli emphasized in democratic elitism was that both nobility and "plebs" play an active role in governing them. They can often collide, but this ("tumults") is expected. Machiavelli in his own words … "do not realize that there are two different dimensions in every Republic: people and great people, and that all laws relating to freedom are caused by dislocation" (Machiavelli, 1965)

for Machiavelli the elite opinion maker . He became the "rhetorical" character of his great republican republicanism. Leaders are identified in open public debates and this is the cornerstone of the concept of democratic elitism.


Aristotle's "Politics" is a controversy of political philosophy. To some extent, the teacher influenced Plato, but Plato was a pure and simple theologian, and Aristotle's writing made it clear that he was creating a more solid and empirical idea. Though his teacher influenced a certain degree, Aristotle sets new ground for exploring the political philosophy.

Aristotle examines the concept of a political community (koinonia policy). Men and women, children and slaves deal with the organization of the household, in this order and in relation to each other. The man as a husband, father and master, is the central political unit of the household. In the state, then, the "natural" hierarchies are recognized from the beginning. He then deals with "the acquisition of wealth by drawing up practices that are termed natural and unnatural commercial forms." He expresses some opinions that are unacceptable in today's world. "… by man's nature it is better, and the woman is lower; and one rule, and the other rule; this principle of necessity extends to all mankind. "Obviously, some people are by nature free and others are slaves, and this latter slavery is both expedient and correct" (The Internet Classics Archive: Aristotle Policy). However, the good judgment of this "natural" order is revealed:

Abuse of this authority is detrimental to both; the body and soul and the whole are in the same interest, and the slave is part of the master, the living, but separated part of his body. Therefore, where the relationship between the master and the slave is natural, there are friends and mutual interest, but if it is based on the law and the inverse force prevails, then Aristotle continues household management and the various means of subsistence. After discussing the moral virtues of slaves and free people, Aristotle maintains that the ruler must "have the moral virtue of perfection, since it is imperative that his task requires artificial craftsmanship and the rational principle is a craft …" (op cit.). This is contrary to the Machiavellian standpoint.

The word "democracy" has a negative meaning for Aristotle. The ideal form of its constitutional government is "Polity (politeia)", which combines the best of aristocracy and democracy. While Plato supported only the rule of the "philosopher king," Aristotle examined the various forms of the rule system in the real world. He discovered the monarchy, only a head of state who could drift toward tyranny. The aristocracy, some of the rules, are another viable constitutional form. This is an oligarchy, a junta can be deflated. Democracy could also be deflated in mass regulation. Aristotle condemns "from democracy to extremes," where the mass of people becomes a victim of a demagoguery and have serious consequences over the law. For Aristotle, "politics" as a mixed and balanced form of government exemplifies all forms of interest representation in the "golden average". Polity was a healthy blend of elite and masses in a mutually maintaining arrangement. This, of course, was the forerunner of the modern concept of democratic elitism. Aristotle did not expect the city state to be one, the few, or the many who worried, whether these state forms were all the state or themselves.

Legality is the constitutional majority in the interests of the whole state under the law. In keeping with the admiration of Aristotle's "gold medal", he liked the growth of middle classes who were not very rich or poor.

Because this wealth is the most respected obedience … Therefore the latter (the poor) do not know how to govern, but know how to submit a servant government, while the former class (the rich ones) only know how to master a master. The result consists of slaves and masters who must not be humans, classy envy and another contempt for their peers. But the ideal purpose of the state is to make as many people as possible, equal and comparable, and this resemblance can be found in the middle class …

Aristotle recognized the best "legislators" as the middle class. Solon is quoted as being called upon to create laws and constitutions for Athens. They say it ended an oligarchian to create the original Athenian democracy. Aristotle noted that Solon was the Athenian-based democracy, which was based on constitutional law and a good mix of political elements. As Plato and Socrates bowed to expert opinion in all matters, Aristotle Solon considered the validity of the majority judgment, at least in constitutional matters.

Aristotle's practical recommendations that balance the wealthy and less wealthy within the state have imposed fines for the rich if they have not participated in public gatherings, do not sit in law courts, pay the poor to participate in the meetings and participate in legal proceedings. It determines that ownership of property rights must be high for the rich and be moderate for the poor. The commentator concludes that Aristotle's "ideal" is to find the average in political affairs and thus create a more permanent political association that is able to secure the means of creating ethical and spiritual virtues in the good life of a citizen . "

With China as an economic superpower and the emergence of the liberal liberal democracies of the West that are struggling to fulfill their ends, the question arises as to whether the Machiavellian solution can provide stability to the current chaotic world order.

Source by sbobet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *