History of modern political thought Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

History of modern political thought - Essay ExampleThose who rely simply on the lion do not understand what they are about. (Machiavelli, 1515) The lion is the proverbial king of the beasts who rules the jungle. Yet, it is not nice for Machiavellis ideal Prince to be simply the most strong of all the animals, and most respected in the jungle. In this regard the animal nature must also embrace the wiliness of the project in its ability to escape tracks, because as Machiavelli wrote the wolves will be waiting for the Prince to attack and strip him of life and power. Ultimately, Machiavelli wrote If custody were entirely good this precept would not hold, precisely because they are bad, and will not keep doctrine with you, you too are not bound to observe it with them. (Machiavelli, 1515) In Chapter XIX Machiavelli extends the analogy of the lion and fox by referencing historical Roman examples of the opposite characters of Commodus, Severus, Antoninus Caracalla, and Maximinus, who he describes as being leaders who did not flicker to commit every kind of iniquity against the people. (Machiavelli, 1515) Machiavelli discusses how the fox nature relates to the ability to make treaties unless also abandon them when they no longer serve the interests of the Prince for power. Machiavelli then discusses how it is important for the Prince to appear publicly to look at good, humanitarian, and valorous qualities in the public eye, but be ruthless behind the public veil in consolidate power with eliminating enemies. Therefore it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them. (Machiavelli, 1515) Question 2 In cod of Hobbes bleak and pessimistic view of human nature, how is the transition from the state of nature to civil society attainable? in other words, are the conclusion of Hobbes theory of absolute government logically sound but politically inapplicable? Hobbes view of the corrupted nature of human society did not technically for him prohibit the centralization of power in the State. In some ways, Hobbes own arguments are comparable to the doctrine of Pluralism advocated in America by James Madison and others. Despite there being three-fold centers or organizations of power, wealth, authority, control, force, tradition, status, prestige, etc. in a society, these could all be centralized in the State through its apparatus, institutions, and operations. As Stuart Hopkins writes inHobbes and Absolute Sovereignty (2011), Hobbes ...was primarily concerned with the problems of union and unity within the commonwealth, with the gimmick of such a unity, and the possibility of common action that is a product of that unity. The absence of unanimity in decision making, and unresolvable conflicts of interest, frustrate and militate against a natural unity and, therefore, in the event of clean-cut conflict, jeopardise the lives and the welfare of the subjects... A civil society, or commonwealth, must have a clearly delineate and