**Dante** formal vs. actual meaning of De Monarchia - formal - goal of state/empire is salvation in heaven - self-actualization - universal peace - depends on - miracles - logical fallacies and weak metaphors - arbitrary authority - combining worldly with otherworldly - "Taking the treatise at face value and judging it as a study of politics, it is worthless, totally worthless." - real meaning - "By “real meaning” I refer to the meaning not in terms of the mythical world of religion, metaphysics, miracles, and pseudo-history (which is the world of the formal meaning of De Monarchia), but in terms of the actual world of space, time, and events. To understand the real meaning, we cannot take the words at face value nor confine our attention to what they explicitly state; we must fit them into the specific context of Dante’s times and his own life. It is characteristic of De Monarchia, and of all similar treatises, that there should be this divorce between formal and real meanings, that the formal meaning should not explicitly state but only indirectly express, and to one or another extent hide and distort, the real meaning. The real meaning is thereby rendered irresponsible, since it is not subject to open and deliberate intellectual control; but the real meaning is nonetheless there." Typical method of political thought 1. divorce between formal and real aims 2. formal aims are supernatural, metaphysical, or transcendental -- not empirical or achievable 3. formal aims are irrelevant to political problems, regardless of whether the arguments are true or false 4. the formal meaning is and indirect expression of the real meaning, but it also obscures the real meaning 5. the real aims are accepted, even if right, for the wrong reasons because no evidence is provided for the real reasons "though there may be incidental passages which increase our fund of real information, the integrating method and the whole conception of politics is precisely that of Dante. Gods, whether of Progress or the Old Testament, ghosts of saintly, or revolutionary, ancestors, abstracted moral imperatives, ideals cut wholly off from mere earth and mankind, utopias beckoning from the marshes of their never-never-land—these, and not the facts of social life together with probable generalizations based on those facts, exercise the final controls over arguments and conclusions. Political analysis becomes, like other dreams, the expression of human wish or the admission of practical failure." ----- **Machiavelli** "There are certain goals which are peculiar and proper to science, without which science does not exist. These are: the accurate and systematic description of public facts; the attempt to correlate sets of these facts in laws; and, through these correlations, the attempt to predict, with some degree of probability, future facts." "In short, though our practical goals may dictate the direction that scientific activity takes, though they show us what we are trying to accomplish by the scientific investigation, what problem we are trying to solve; nevertheless, the logic of the scientific inquiry itself is not controlled by the practical aims but by science’s own aims, by the effort to describe facts and to correlate them." Relevant historical context - post-Roman Empire, Italy was a fragmented collection of city-states - some thrived as cultural hubs and were large enough to hold their own politically -- small enough to be viable, not doing too much -- had armies, focused on trade and commerce - left them open to invasions - buoyed by trade through 15th century - but then began to slip, some second-generation decadence, markets becoming worldwide too much to bear -- required standardized money and taxation - could remain under existing structure and retrogress, decline economically and culturally - Or: could unify and organize as a nation "Machiavelli concluded that Italy could be unified only through a Prince, who would take the initiative in consolidating the country into a nation. Those who think sentimentally rather than scientifically about politics are sure to misunderstand this conclusion. Machiavelli did not reach it because he preferred a monarchy or absolutist government—we shall see later what his own preferences were. He reached it because he found that it was dictated by the evidence." "Machiavelli undertook his studies of politics for the sake of very definite goals, one of which I have analyzed in this section. These goals, like all goals, have an ethical content: indeed, ethics is simply the consideration of human behavior from the point of view of goals, standards, norms, and ideals. Machiavelli divorced politics from a certain kind of ethics—namely, from a transcendental, otherworldly, and, it may be added, very rotten ethics. But he did so in order to bring politics and ethics more closely into line, and to locate both of them firmly in the real world of space and time and history, which is the only world about which we can know anything. Machiavelli is as ethical a political writer as Dante. The difference is that Machiavelli’s ethics are much better." Machiavelli's method 1. Uses words in such a way that their meaning can be understood in terms of the real world 1. NOT: dogmatism, mysticism as starting point 2. Politics as the study for power among men 1. NOT: search for ideal society, maximum social welfare, expression of man's aspiration for peace 3. Begins with facts, assembles them systematically 1. NOT: starting with supposed principles governing the universe, society, and man 2. "For Machiavelli, when the facts decide, it is the principles that must be scrapped." 4. Seeking generalizations that help approximate The nature of political man as a distinct from generalized "human nature" - similar to Adam Smith "economic man" - cannot be derived from psychology, which is not comprehensive view of human nature - interested in man as it relates to the **struggle for power** - Machiavelli is not commenting on humanity as a whole - requires obtaining evidence directly from the realm of the attempts to gain power No man is perfectly good or bad - very few princes have been good - to excuse the prince is a great error Terminology - governmental forms as "monarchies" (principalities) or "commonwealths" (republics) - formal power is in the hands of 1 vs. more than 1 - governmental forms + societal relations: monarchy, aristocracy, democracy - taken from Aristotle - democracy vs. aristocracy distinguishes between relative power of nobility and common people - even "common people" were the upper classes of the masses in terms of welath - lower strata is "rabble" or "the multitude" Conception of cyclical history, constancy of change - flourishing plants seeds of destruction, which plants seeds for strength - necessity of change partially due to limitless hunger for power - "our desire being greater than our power to acquire, our minds are never at rest with what we enjoy. And this is the occasion of all our varieties of fortune.” Fortune as a dominant force, not just the will of individuals Religion as essential to the well being of the state - political function and utility, not speaking to the truth or falsehood of any religion - a bit of irony? but also makes sense Preference for a republic over monarchy - form to which he believes he owes all prosperity of his times - monarchy requires endowing prince with superhuman virtue - still: advocates for monarchy at times, including for the unification of Italy, requires a prince Liberty as independence, no subjection to another group -- instead governed by law - requires armed strength of the citizenry - also requires armed force of the state, not on force of individuals or groups - all of this requires rule of law ----- **Mosca** Ruler type vs. ruled type - ruled = general populous, no struggle for power - politically passive, do not have a will to individual power - want to manage their own affairs and have minimum security - have a respect for firm authority, at certain times require a "prince" to unite them - ruler = those who aspire to power - has virtu -> ambition, drive, spirit - Platonic "will to power" - "They drive themselves as well as others; they have that quality which makes them keep going, endure amid difficulties, persist against dangers." - has strength, esp. martial strength - even more common: fraud to achieve their rule - knows when to use Law vs. force/violence - adapts to times and waves of fortune - not all are good (most are not) -- can channel power towards nefarious ends - commentary about characteristics intended to be descriptive, not normative ----- **Sorel** ----- **Michels** Masterpiece: *Policitcal Parties* Central question: "In what ways is the realization of democracy affected by the tendencies inherent in social organization?" Working class movements for democratic struggle often tend towards oligarchy themselves -- **oligarchy is a tendency of organizations** themselves. **Direct democracy is impossible** for mechanical and technical reasons. - choices have to be limited to a small, discrete menu of alternatives which do not collectively represent divergent views of the populus - only a few speakers can be heard, and charisma / rhetorical ability have outsized impact - decisions must be made quickly - organizational decision making has significant overhead **Large organizations are run by minority leadership.** Sovereignty (i.e. as expressed via decision making where group cannot decide) cannot be delegated. Despite stated preference otherwise, revealed preference is that the **majority actually likes the direction and guidance of leadership**, which it treats as heroic. Masses do not spontaneously self-organize after losing a leader until a new leader emerges. **Qualities of leaders:** - oratorical talent - prestige of celebrity - force of will - causes lesser wills to obey - knowledge - conviction - strength of ideas, borderline fanaticism - self-sufficiency (even if arrogant) - sometimes: goodness of heart and disinterestedness (reminds crowd of Christ) Leaders control an organization's **use and distribution of funds**. Creation, preservation, and **consolidation of power via the press**. Leaders **impose discipline** and **select delegates**. The existence of **opposition is the only check on autocratic tendencies of leaders**. At the **beginning, leaders often have sincere motives**. Later, it is **difficult to give up power** and separate personal from organizational interests. These "Bonapartist" leaders justify themselves to be the **perfect embodiment of the will of the group**. "No Machiavellian assumes without inquiry that the various goals are possible. A goal must be possible before there is any point in considering it desirable. It is not possible merely because it sounds pleasant or because men want it badly." ---- **Pareto** Residues and derivations - Residues - persistent, thematic, "inevitable"? - Derivations - particular, contingent, temporal, contextual ----- **Politics and truth**