Props to Machiavelli

Last Friday my Western Civilization class discussed Machiavelli's The Prince. The overall reaction was surprising. Without a doubt Machiavelli gets a bad rap, often being labeled as a tyrant or a man of pure evil. However, Machiavelli's advice centers around what is necessary, and that includes being generous as well as being ruthless. To him, neither characteristic is good or bad in and of itself, and shouldn't be implemented to an excess for practical reasons. The focus on the practical and not the ideal paved the way for the philosophy of Realpolitik, which highlights a "The end justifies the means" mentality.

What I thought was interesting about some of my classmates' responses was the fact that many of them felt that Machiavelli's ideas were refreshing compared to the impractical ideas of Jesus, Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, the Qur'an, Seneca, etc. Many students praised the "realness" of the work and liked the fact that Machiavelli didn't shy away from the harsh facts of life. All of this I can at least sympathize with, but their perspective seemed to clash with one of the most popular pastimes of college students in general - criticizing our own government. I asked the question: "How is it that we can applaud Machiavelli's tactics for gaining and holding power, and then turn around and criticize our political leaders -be they Democrat, Republican, Green, or Whatever- when they appeal to the necessity of actions that we as a majority deem wrong, immoral, or tyrannical?" (A hot topic right now would be the use of torture... and the dance that politicians do when asked to define torture) I don't usually take pride in creating awkward atmospheres in university classrooms, but it grew so uncomfortably quite in that room that I must. People looked at each other in silence, curious to see who would be bold enough to offer their opinion. It was all much more dramatic that it should have been, but finally, a few students put their two cents in and my question was completely avoided.