i believe the satire theory more as time goes on

>>24692872
No, obviously. Try Schmitt for something newer.
P.S: Why does nearly every depiction of him give him that smile? The light smirk is just a part of his image. Maybe because he looks evil with it.
>>24692977
Can you please explain why?

>>24692872
he was right tho

Western equivalent of Art of War. Highly overrated. And also often quoted outside the specific historical context that made it so notable in the first place.

>>24692872
>Be cold or something idk... mwahaha
Did you read the book?

>>24692872
The difference between a good leader and shit leader is thus:
>what can I do for you?
>what can you do for me

Most of his quotes nowadays mean almost the opposite of what he meant when he wrote it.

"It's better to be feared than to be loved" for example is taken out of context. He claims it's EASIER to be feared than it is to be loved, but that being loved is preferable as a leader as it is more stable for the regime.

"When you kill, kill them all" didn't mean "Just show no mercy lmao". What was meant is that if you are going to take an action that is very unpopular like killing opposition you should do so in one fell swoop rather than isolated killings. Reasoning being that the general public will just count is as ONE bad thing you did rather than multiple transgressions if you do it separately.

"Dismiss morality and focus on outcome" Doesn't mean "Just be a tyrant that abuses his subjects for his own gains" The context was in improving your subjects quality of life you should focus on outcome, not on whatever the cultural beliefs and taboos were. If there is a plague you can force people into the fucking baths against their will which is justified by the lower total death rate and an increase in quality of life.

Sometimes it feels like there is just a immortal troll throughout history on purpose twisting everything machiavelli said to secretly be malicious and heinous while most of his claims were to benefit the good of the people.

This is also why I DON'T subscribe to the "satire theory" even the fucking satire theory doesn't realize the context of what was written. The book needs to be understood with a lot of letters and other writings that were written alongside of it but not put into the book itself

>>24693431
>"It's better to be feared than to be loved"
>Uhm ACKSHUALLY he means the opposite
How

>>24693445
It's taken out of context because it doesn't include the explanation. Being loved is preferable and more stable for a regime. However it's often impossible or extremely hard for a leader to accomplish that, being feared is very easy to achieve. Therefore (if you are a incompetent or middling leader) it's better to be feared than to be loved. Remember he wrote this entire section in the context of assuming the leader was incompetent and how to minimize incompetence, not maximize brilliance or optimize for the best regime possible.

That is one of the many misconceptions people have about machiavelli. It was only meant to apply to the worst leaders to minimize the (unintentional) harm they inflicted upon the people.

It's like telling a small kid to not use a fork and knife but eat with hands instead, and then people take it out of context as "eating with your hands is superior to cutlery" while what was meant was just that small incompetent children can't handle knifes yet.

>>24693431
>He claims it's EASIER to be feared than it is to be loved, but that being loved is preferable as a leader
That's not it at all.
People do misinterpret this, but it's usually that people think he's saying a ruler should strive ONLY to be feared.

But he says a ruler should be feared AND loved if he can.
Only if he cannot be both, it would be better to choose to be feared, but even then he warns that being feared will not be enough if a ruler is hated by his subjects. In this sense one cannot rule only by fear.

if you wanna operate in politics, catch niggas lackin or get caught fr fr on my momma

>>24692872
>Be nice and you'll get walked over
>Be ruthless and mfs will think twice about squaring up on you
>Also avoid mercenaries
It's not bad advice.

>>24692977
I dont think it makes sense given the context. People were barely experimenting with non completely chivalrous notions of justification.

To not just be writing frankly realpolitik, but satirically realpolitik doesn't make sense in a world where writing normal realpolitik was taboo.

>>24692872
People need to stop taking this shit so seriously it's just some guy's cover letter for a government job

People need to stop reading one book and thinking they’re experts on a topic. And most of this board can’t even accomplish that.