Politics is an art of ruling people and it is a great responsibility to be a ruler. Politics also can be considered as a certain philosophy. Socrates and Machiavelli are very well-known philosophers who devoted a lot of writings to politics. There is a connection between politics and the principles of morality. Machiavelli and Socrates offer the basic principles of governance. Human beings feel safer when they follow actions which have already proven to be successful.
Machiavelli offers the theory of leadership which helps create public order and maintain stability in the society. He also drew the conclusion that people are governed by two motives: love and fear – a successful ruler uses both of them. In other words, the combination of love and fear allows the ruler to influence human beings.
However, in real life, it is almost impossible to behave according to Machiavelli. Therefore, it is necessary to work in a way that our fear does not turn into hatred. Besides, these two motives are ruled by ambition which is inherent in everybody. The leader needs to know who exactly is more ambitious and, as a consequence, is more dangerous for him as a ruler.
Unlike Machiavelli, Socrates presented a less-strict doctrine of leadership and power. He thought that the leader should be smart and wise. He said, “Let him that would move the world first move himself.”
Thus, a person who wants to be a leader should be more attentive to themselves. People are more likely to reach something when they do not tell anybody about their intentions. Socrates saw the leader with a great will, but did not try to teach the leader to be as rigid as Machiavelli’s.
Machiavelli is considered to advocate a rigid leader in his works, for whom the ends justify the means. Some people think that he is a teacher of evil. He mentioned that the world of politics and government is not safe. In order to survive, a politician must have a strong character and the ability to perform unsavoury acts.
However, Socrates has another point of view. He also criticised democracy like Machiavelli. On the other hand, he did not respect tyranny, arbitrariness, violence and lawlessness. Socrates implied that the governor has to be competent. In addition, the representative of authority requires adequate knowledge to manage human beings. In the end, he was condemned to death for “impiety”. It implies contempt of the divine character of authority and irreverence towards the supreme being.
The teachings of Machiavelli have a lot in common with the modern governors. The principles of Machiavelli may be useful in detaining terrorist prisoners. The representatives of authority have to consider using adequate pressure to create stability and order. The deception of the people is also effective for successful management, because the author of this theory can deceive and pretend to be a professional. On the other hand, Socrates did not respect tyranny, as he considered that reasonable people with their own outlooks on life had already suffered from them.
About the author: Davide Print is the writer at a company which supplies students and writers with quality writing tips.