niccolò machiavelli and the birth of political philosophy · niccolo machiavelli -the birth of...

NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI -THE BIRTH OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

1

“He who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation.”

Niccolò Machiavelli and the Birth of Political

Philosophy Georges M. Halpern, MD, PhD

with Yves P. Huin, MSME, MBA


2

For Easter 1952, the theater group Les Théophiliens of the University of Paris-Sorbonne was invited to participate in the International Festival of UniversityTheaterTroupesinParma,Italy.Iwaspartofthegroup–andjoined,withexcitement:myfirstrealimmersivevisittolaBellaItalia!WehadselectedAucassinetNicolette,a12th/13thcenturychantefable, inwhichIwasplayingtheKingofTorelore,givingbirthtoachild(whilehiswife/queenisfightingwiththearmy)-apredictionfortheLGBTcommunity?

We were lodged in the University dorms, and shared the floor with thecomedians/studentsoftheUniversitàcáFoscariofVenezia(Venice).Theydecidedto teachme Italian,with a hint of venetian colloquialisms; Iwas absorbing theirconversationslikeblottingpaper!

Duringourrecesses–thenumberofstageswaslimited-IvisitedthenearbyGalleriaNazionalediParmawhereIwasgreetedbytheMadonnaconBambinoeSantiofFra


3

Angelico.

Mybreathstopped.Ifeltsomewhatstruckbylightning:myfirstencounterwiththePrimitiviandtheirpurest,sparlingpaletteofcolors.Behindthismasterpiece,thehalldisplayed rows andmore rowsof 13th-14thcentury artists. I felt both elated anddizzy;loveatfirstsight,butforever.

WealsovisitedLeRoncole,nearBussetowhereJosephVerdi(GiuseppeFortuninoFrancisco Verdi)was born in the thenDépartement Taro (French 1stEmpire) onOctober9th,1813.Thisvisitchangedmymusicaltastes:IhavebeenafanofVerdieversince.


4

ThatOctober1952theInternationalUniversityTheaterFestivalsettledinFirenze(Florence),where–again!-wesharedadormwiththecáFoscaristudents.Firenzeismuchmorecomplex,famous,celebratedthanParma.Wholelibrariesaredevotedtoitstreasures,architecture,history,influence,majestyandcharms.Fortunately–forme- one of the actors of cá Foscariwas a student on the 15th-16th century ofFirenze(wherehegrewup),anda futurefamousarchitectanddesigner:GaetanoPescetookmeunderhiswing,andweexploredmanyofthevicoli,piazze,palazzi,museiand landmarks thatmarkedandwitnessed theRenaissancerevolution thatwouldchangetheworld.Onecharacterstoodapartandhoveredoverthatperiod:NiccolòdiBernardodeiMachiavelliorMachiavelli.AtoneofthelibrerieIacquiredfora few lire a used copy of Il Principe (The Prince) –and struggled for weeks tounderstandandappreciateit.


5

Niccolò Machiavelli: The Man Onthedoorofmyoffice,inPortolaValley,IhavepinnedasmallposterwithaDevil’simageandassubtitle:

Lasciate Ogni Speranza, Voi Che Entrate

That’stheinscriptiononthegatetoHellinoneofthefirstEnglishtranslationsofTheDivineComedy,byHenryFrancisCary, in1814.Youprobablyknow itas the lesstongue-twisting“Abandonhopeallyewhoenterhere,”whichistheepigraphforBretEastonEllis’sAmericanPsycho,hangsasawarningabovetheentrancetotheDisneytheme park ride Pirates of the Caribbean, appears in the videogame World ofWarcraft,andhasbeenrepurposedasalyricbyTheGaslightAnthem.

Dante’s popularization of the Florentine Tuscan language helped make Florence the epicenter of the Renaissance, and his likeness is on this Uffizi gallery fresco

Florentine Tuscan became the lingua franca of Italy because of La DivinaCommedia,helpingtoestablishFlorenceasthecreativehuboftheRenaissance.It


6

alsobecame the language inwhichDante’s literarydescendantsBoccaccio andPetrarchwouldwrite–eventuallyjustknownasItalian.Throughtheforceofhiswords,DantehelpedcreatetheveryideaoftheItalianlanguagethatis.WritinginthevernacularandhelpingtocreateanewvernacularformuchofItaly,allowedDante’s ideas to takewide root – and helped set the stage for the intellectualrevolutions to come in the Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment. Twocenturieslater,ProtestantleaderswouldadvocatethatreadingtheBibleinyourownvernacularmeantthatyoucouldgiveityourownindividualunderstanding,underminingtheideathatsalvationispossibleonlythroughtheRomanChurch–somethingDantehimselfhadalreadydonebyoutrightinventingelementsofthecosmologyhepresentsinLaDivinaCommedia.NowonderNiccolòMachiavelliwasaFlorentine!

MachiavellicontributedtomanyimportantdiscoursesinWesternthought-politicaltheory most notably, but also history and historiography, Italian literature, theprinciples of warfare, and diplomacy. But Machiavelli never seems to have


7

considered himself a philosopher, nor do his credentials suggest that he fitscomfortably into standard models of academic philosophy. His writings arenotoriouslyunsystematic,inconsistentandsometimesself-contradictory.Hetendstoappealtoexperienceandexampleintheplaceofrigorouslogicalanalysis.

Machiavelli may have grazed at the fringes of philosophy, but the impact of hismusingshasbeenwidespreadandlasting.ThetermsMachiavellianorMachiavellismfind regular purchase among philosophers concerned with a range of ethical,political,andpsychologicalphenomena.

Moreover, in Machiavelli's critique of “grand” philosophical schemes, we find achallenge to the enterprise of philosophy that commands attention anddemandsconsiderationandresponse.Thus,Machiavellideservesaplaceatthetableinanycomprehensivesurveyofphilosophy.

He was born 3 May 1469 in Florence and at a young age became a pupil of arenowned Latin teacher, Paolo da Ronciglione. He attended the University ofFlorence, and even a cursory glance at his corpus reveals that he received anexcellenthumanisteducation.

It is onlywithhis entrance intopublic view,withhis appointment as theSecondChancellor of the Republic of Florence, however, that we get a full and accuratepicture of his life. For the next fourteen years,Machiavelli engaged in a flurry ofdiplomaticactivityonbehalfofFlorence,travellingtothemajorcentersofItalyaswellastotheroyalcourtofFranceandtotheimperialcuriaofMaximilian.Wehaveletters,dispatches,andoccasionalwritingsthattestifytohispoliticalassignmentsaswellastohisacutetalentfortheanalysisofpersonalitiesandinstitutions.

Florence had been under a republican government since 1494,when the leadingMedici family and its supportershadbeendrivenoutofpower.During this time,Machiavelli thrived under the patronage of the Florentine gonfaloniere PieroSoderini.

In 1512, however,with the assistance of Spanish troops, theMedici defeated therepublic's armed forces and dissolved the government. Machiavelli was a directvictimoftheregimechange:hewasinitiallyplacedinaformofinternalexileand,whenhewas(wrongly)suspectedofconspiringagainsttheMediciin1513,hewasimprisonedand tortured for severalweeks.His retirement thereafter tohis farm


8

outsideofFlorenceaffordedtheoccasionandtheimpetusforhimtoturntoliterarypursuits.

Thefirstofhiswritingsinamorereflectiveveinwasalsotheonemostcommonlyassociatedwithhisname,IlPrincipe(ThePrince).Writtenattheendof1513,butpublished posthumously in 1532, Il Principewas composed in great haste by anauthorwhowasseekingtoregainhisstatusintheFlorentinegovernment.

Machiavelli'sforcedretirementledhimtootherliteraryactivities.Hewroteverse,plays, and short prose, penned a study ofDell'arte della guerra (TheArt ofWar,1521),andbiographicalandhistoricalsketches.

He composedhisothermajor contribution topolitical thought,Discorsi sopra laprimadecadiTitoLivio(DiscoursesontheTenBooksofTitusLivy),anexpositionoftheprinciplesofrepublicanrulemasqueradingasacommentaryontheworkofthe famous historian of the Roman Republic. Unlike Il Principe, theDiscorsiwasauthoredoveralongperiod,andonlypublishedposthumouslyin1531.

Neartheendofhislife,MachiavellibegantoreturntothefavoroftheMedicifamily.In 1520, he was commissioned by Cardinal Giulio de'Medici to compose IstorieFiorentine(FlorentineHistories),anassignmentcompletedin1525andpresentedtotheCardinal,whohadsinceascendedthepapalthroneasClementVII,inRome.Beforehecouldachieveafullrehabilitation,hediedon21June1527.


9

Il Principe

Before thisdisruptivebook,mostauthorscounseledrulers that if theywanted tosucceed,enjoyalongandpeacefulreignandpasstheirofficedowntotheiroffspring,theymustbesuretobehaveinaccordancewithconventionalstandardsofethicalgoodness.Itwasthoughtthatrulersdidwellwhentheydidgood;theyearnedtherighttobeobeyedandrespectedbecausetheyshowedthemselvestobevirtuousandmorallyupright.

It is precisely this moralistic view of authority that Machiavelli criticizes in IlPrincipe:thereisnomoralbasisonwhichtojudgethedifferencebetweenlegitimateand illegitimate uses of power. Authority and power are essentially coequal:whoeverhaspowerhastherighttocommand;goodnessdoesnotensurepowerandthegoodpersonhasnomoreauthoritybybeinggood.Machiavellisaysthattheonlyrealconcernofthepoliticalruleristheacquisitionandmaintenanceofpower.


10

Hearguesthatthenotionoflegitimaterightsofrulershipaddsnothingtotheactualpossession of power. For Machiavelli, power characteristically defines politicalactivity,andhenceitisnecessaryforanysuccessfulrulertoknowhowpoweristobe used. Only by means of the proper application of power, can individuals bebroughttoobeyandwilltherulerbeabletomaintainthestateinsafetyandsecurity.

Machiavelli acknowledges that good laws and good arms constitute the dualfoundationsofawell-orderedpoliticalsystem.Butsincecoercioncreateslegality,heconcentrates his attention on force. He writes “Since there cannot be good lawswithoutgoodarms,Iwillnotconsiderlawsbutspeakofarms;”i.e.thelegitimacyoflawrestsentirelyuponthethreatofcoerciveforce.Machiavelliconcludesthatfearis always preferable to affection in subjects, just as violence and deception aresuperiortolegalityineffectivelycontrollingthem.

Machiavelliobserves that “one can say this ingeneralofmen: theyareungrateful,disloyal,insincereanddeceitful,timidofdangerandavidofprofit….Loveisabondofobligationwhichthesemiserablecreaturesbreakwheneveritsuitsthemtodoso;butfearholdsthemfastbyadreadofpunishmentthatneverpasses.”Machiavellidoesnothaveatheoryofobligationseparatefromtheimpositionofpower;peopleobeyonlybecause they fear theconsequencesofnotdoingso,whether the lossof lifeorofprivileges.

Concomitantly, a Machiavellian perspective directly attacks the notion of anygroundingforauthorityindependentofthesheerpossessionofpower:peoplearecompelledtoobeypurelyindeferencetothesuperiorpowerofthestate.Itispowerwhichinthefinalinstanceisnecessaryfortheenforcementofconflictingviewsofwhatoneoughttodo;onecanonlychoosenottoobeyifhepossessesthepowertoresistthedemandsofthestate,orwillingtoaccepttheconsequencesofthestate'ssuperiorityofcoerciveforce.

Machiavelli'sargumentinIlPrincipeisdesignedtodemonstratethatpoliticscanonlycoherentlybedefinedintermsofthesupremacyofcoercivepower;authorityasarighttocommandhasnoindependentstatus;itismeaninglessandfutiletospeakofany claim to authority and the right to command which is detached from thepossessionofsuperiorpoliticalpower.Therulerwholivesbyhisrightsalonewillsurely wither and die by those same rights, because in the rough-and-tumble ofpoliticalconflictthosewhopreferpowertoauthorityaremorelikelytosucceed.The


11

authorityof statesand their lawswillneverbeacknowledgedwhen theyarenotsupportedbyashowofpowerwhichrendersobedienceinescapable.Themethodsforachievingobediencearevaried,anddependheavilyupontheforesightthattheprinceexercises.Hence,thesuccessfulrulerneedsspecialtraining.


12

Potere, Virtù, Fortuna (Power, Virtue, Fortune)

Machiavelli offers us a vision of political rule purged of extraneous moralizinginfluencesandfullyawareofthefoundationsofpoliticsintheeffectiveexerciseofpower.ThetermthatcapturesMachiavelli'svisionofpowerpoliticsisvirtù.Whilethe Italian word would normally be translated into English as “virtue,” theconventional connotation of moral goodness, Machiavelli obviously meanssomethingdifferentwhenherefers to thevirtùof theprince: theconceptofvirtùreferstotherangeofpersonalqualitiesthattheprinceneedsto“maintainhisstate”andto“achievegreatthings,”thetwomarkersofpower;therecanbenoequivalencebetween the conventional virtues and Machiavellian virtù. Machiavelli expectsprincesofthehighestvirtùtobehaveinacompletelyevilfashion.Tobeapersonofvirtù,theprinceaboveallelsemustacquirea“flexibledisposition.”Machiavelliseespoliticstobeasortofabattlefieldonadifferentscale.Hence,theprincejustlikethegeneral needs to be in possession of virtù, that is, to knowwhich strategies andtechniquesareappropriatetowhatcircumstances.Virtùisthetouchstoneofpoliticalsuccess.


13

WhatisthelinkbetweenvirtùandtheeffectiveexerciseofpowerforMachiavelli?The answer isFortuna (usually translated as “fortune”).Fortuna is the enemy ofpoliticalorder,theultimatethreattothesafetyandsecurityofthestate.Machiavelli'sFortunaisamalevolentanduncompromisingfountofhumanmisery,affliction,anddisaster.

Machiavelliassertsthatfortunaresembles“oneofourdestructiveriverswhich,whenitisangry,turnstheplainsintolakes,throwsdownthetreesandbuildings,takesearthfromonespot,putsitinanother;everyonefleesbeforetheflood;everyoneyieldstoitsfuryandnowhere can repel it.”But it ispossible to takeprecautions todivert theworstconsequencesofthenaturalelements.“ThesamethingshappenaboutFortuna;sheshowsherpowerwherevirtùandwisdomdonotpreparetoresisther,anddirectsher fury where she knows that no dykes or embankments are ready to hold her”.Fortunamayberesistedbyhumanbeings,butonlyinthosecircumstanceswherevirtù and wisdom have already prepared for her inevitable arrival. The wantonbehavior ofFortunademands an aggressive, even violent response, lest she takeadvantageofthosemenwhoaretooretiringor“effeminate”todominateher.

Onlypreparation topose an extreme response to the vicissitudes ofFortunawillensure victory against her. This is what virtùprovides: the ability to respond to(mis)fortuneatanytimeandinanyway,thatisnecessary.Niccolò Machiavelli has a bad reputation. Ever since the 16th century, whenmanuscript copies of his greatworkIl Principe (The Prince)began to circulate inEurope, his family name has been used to describe a particularly nasty form ofpolitics:calculating,cutthroatandself-interested.Thereare,tobesure,reasonsforthis.Machiavelliatonepointadvisesapoliticalleaderwhohasrecentlyannexedanewterritorytomakesuretoeliminatethebloodlineofthepreviousrulerlesttheyform a conspiracy to unseat him.He also praises the ‘cruelty…well-used’by themercenary captainCesareBorgia in laying the foundationsofhis ruleof theareaaroundRome.However,Machiavellididnotinvent‘Machiavellianpolitics’.Norwashisadvocacyofforceandfraudtoacquireandmaintainrulethecauseofindividualleadersusingthem.WhatthendidMachiavellido?Whatdidhewanttoachieve?

IntheAEON.coissueofNovember19th,2018,CatherineZuckert,theNancyReevesDreuxProfessor of Political Science at Notre Dame University in Indiana tries to


14

address the issue. She starts by looking into Chapter 15 ofThe Prince, inwhichMachiavelliinfamouslydeclares:

I fear that … I may be held presumptuous … But sincemy intent is to writesomethingusefultowhoeverunderstandsit,ithasappearedtomemorefittingtogodirectly to theeffectual truthof the thing than to the imaginationof it.Manyhaveimaginedrepublicsandprincipalitiesthathaveneverbeenseenorknowntoexistintruth;foritissofarfromhowonelivestohowoneshouldlivethathewholetsgoofwhatisdoneforwhatshouldbedonelearnshisruinratherthanhispreservation.Foramanwhowantstomakeaprofessionofgoodinallregardsmustcometoruinamongsomanywhoarenotgood.

Unlike the imaginary republics and principalities advocated by earlier politicaltheoristssuchasPlato,Aristotle,AugustineandAquinas, inwhichbothgovernorsandgovernedweretobeeducatedtobeasvirtuousaspossible,Machiavelliproposestoteachpoliticalleaders,bothpotentialandactual,‘tobeablenottobegoodandtouseornotusethatknowledgeaccordingtonecessity’.

Despite his reputation as a teacher of tyrants, if not a teacher of evilper se, athoughtfulreaderrecognizesimmediatelythatthiscouldnothavebeenMachiavelli’sintention.Whowouldneedtolearn‘tobeablenottobegood’?ClearlynotthelikesofBorgiaortheharshandduplicitousRomanemperorSeverus,whomMachiavellialsopraises.Bydeceivingandkillingtheircompetitors,suchmenprovedthattheywere‘ablenottobegood’withouthishelp.However,theymightnothaveknownhowtouseandnotusethatknowledgeaccordingtonecessity.Borgiawasexiledbytheman he helped to make pope, and Severus was unable to teach his son how toperpetuatehisfamily’srule.AsMachiavelliobserves,leaderstendtopersistinusingthemeansthathaveenabledthemtosucceedinthepast,evenwhenthosemeansarenolongersuitedtothecircumstances.Theimpetuouscontinuetoforgeaheadevenwhencautioniswarranted,andthecautiousdonotseizetheopportunitiesthatarise. In teachinghis readers tobeablenottobegoodand touseornotuse thatknowledgeaccording tonecessity,Machiavelli thusappears tobeaddressing twosortsofpoliticalactors:thegood,whodonotknowhowtobebad,butneedtolearntobeabletodosotobeeffective;andthebad,whodonotknowhowtouse(ornotuse)their‘ability’toestablishalastingregime.

WhydidMachiavellithinksuchalessonwasneeded?Accordingtohim,mosthuman


15

beingsdonotactuallywanttobevirtuousorgood.Regardedasindividuals,humanbeingsareweakandneedy.Byseekingtoacquireevermoreandtoprotectwhatwehavealreadyamassed,wenaturallycomeintoconflict.Wethusjointogethertoformpoliticalcommunitiesnotonlytoacquirewhatweneedbutalsotoprotectwhatwehaveacquiredfromthepredationsofothers.Butoncesuchpoliticalcommunitiesareformed,theirmembersalsobecomedividedbytwomutuallyopposed‘humors’or‘appetites’:thedesireof‘thegreat’(or,aswemightsaytoday,theelite)tocommandand oppress the people, and the desire of the people not to be commanded andoppressed.Itisanillusiontothinkthattheleadersorordinarycitizensofapoliticalcommunityseeka‘commongood’beyonddefendingthatcommunityfromexternalpredators.Therewillalwaysbeamoreorlessexplicitconflictbetweenthosewhowanttoruleandthosewhodonotwanttoberuled.InThePrince,Machiavellistatesthat there are three possible outcomes of the conflict between the two humors:principality,libertyorlicense.Butinabookostensiblydevotedtotheeducationofa‘prince’,hedoesnotexplainhow‘liberty’canbeachievedthroughabalancingofthetwohumors;hereservesthatlessonforhisDiscoursesonLivy,inwhichhepraisestheRomanrepublicasanexampleofhowthathappened.InThePrince,heconfineshimselftourgingpoliticalleaders,oncetheyacquirepower,toseekthesupportoftheirpeople.

The first reason he suggests that a leader should seek the support of the peopleratherthanfavoringhis‘great’alliesorpartisansisthattheambitious‘great’regardthemselvesashisequals,andthereforewishtodisplacehim.Theywilldemandevermoreofficesandgoodsasthepriceoftheircontinuedsupport.Attemptstosatisfythemwillnecessarily failand, in failing,addtothe leader’senemies.A leadercansatisfyhispeople,however,because ‘theendofthepeople ismoredecent(onesto)thanthatofthegreat,sincethegreatwanttooppressandthepeoplewantnottobeoppressed’.

Secondandmorefundamental,thereisstrengthinnumbers:thepeoplearemuchmore numerous than the great. Machiavelli likes to use shocking examples andlanguage. He points to the historical example of Borgia as well as to OliverottoEuffreducci,theruthlessrulerofFermo,andAgathocles,tyrantofSyracuse,toshowthattherelativelyfew‘great’inanyparticularpolitycanbeassembledunderfalsepretencesandslaughteredbutremindshisreadersthata‘prince’willhavenooneto


16

rule ifhemurdersmostofhispeople.Apolitical leaderwillneedsubordinatestohelphimrule,buthecandoperfectlywellwithoutanygivensetof‘great’persons,sincehe‘canmakeandunmakethemeveryday’.Hecanmakesome‘great’bygivingthem lands and offices, or unmake them by taking these, and their lives, away.Machiavellithusindicatesthatthe‘great’arenotdifferentfromthemanybynature-human nature is the same in all. Because those granted high offices havemorepowerandgoods,theynolongerfeelasliabletooppressionasthepeoplemerelysubjecttothegovernment.Ratherthandesiringmerelynottobeoppressed,becauseoftheirrelativepositionsthe‘great’cometodesiretoacquiremorebyoppressingothers.

Havingobservedthatallhumanbeingsfundamentallydesiretopreservethemselvesand,intryingtodoso,strivetoacquireevermore,MachiavellitriesinThePrincetopersuadethepoliticallyambitiousthat,howevertheyacquirerule,thebestwaytokeepthemselvesinofficeistosatisfytheirpeople’sdesiretohavetheirlives,familiesand properties secured. In teaching political leaders ‘to be able not to be good’,Machiavellidoesnot,therefore,simplyadvocateself-interested,immoraloramoralbehavior.Heappeals to thedesireof thepoliticallyambitious to rule to convincethemthatthebestwayofrealizingtheirdesireistosatisfythedesireoftheirpeoplenottobeoppressed.Satisfyingthedesireofthepeopletobesecureintheir lives,families and property is and ought to be the end or purpose of government, asMachiavelliseesit.However,becauseheexplicitlydedicatedThePrincetoaprinceand addressed his advice to the politically ambitious, many readers andcommentatorshavemissedthiscentraldemocraticthrustofhisargument.

MachiavelliteachesreadersofThePrincetobeablenottobegoodbyshowingthemthat practices and attitudes thought to be virtuous in private individuals havedeleteriousresultsforpublicofficials.Liberalitywaspraisedbyancientmoralists,andgenerosityorcharityhasbeenpraisedbyChristians(andothers) to thisday.However,Machiavellipointsout,apoliticalleaderwhodepleteshisownresourcesbygenerouslygrantingoffices,lands,titlesandotheremolumentstohisaristocraticfriends or partisans will lose their support when he needs it, unless that leaderacquiresnewfundsbytaxinghispeopleandsoarousingtheirhatred.Ratherthansquanderhis capitalby rewardinganungrateful few,apolitical leaderwillprovehimselftobetrulyliberaltothemanybyconservinghisownresourcessothathe


17

will be able to use them to defend himself and his government when needed.Likewise,apoliticalleaderwhopardonscriminalsmightappeartobemercifultoafew,butheiscrueltohismanysubjectsorfellowcitizenswhofearfortheirlivesandpropertywhenthelawisnotenforced.Machiavelliarguesthatpoliticalleadersmustusebothforceandfraudtoacquireandmaintainpower.Buthewarnsthattheymustalways strive toappearto be full ofmercy, faith, honesty, humility and religion –especially religion– even if they cannot be so in fact. (Anyone accusedof being a‘Machiavellian prince’ has not, therefore, succeeded in becoming such.)Whywilleveryonenotmerelybelievebutpraiseaheadofstatewhenheclaimstobewagingwar,rigorouslyenforcingthelaw,orraisingtaxesforthesakeofthetruefaithorhumanity?Ifapoliticalleaderdoeswhatisnecessaryto‘winandmaintainastate’,Machiavelliassureshisreaders,‘themeanswillalwaysbejudgedhonorable,andwillbepraisedbyeveryone’.

Readersoftentakethistomeansimplythattheendjustifiesthemeans.Machiavellirefers, however, to a particular end: establishing andmaintaining law and order,which is inthepeople’s interestasmuchas it is intheruler’s. It isdifficult, ifnotimpossible, for observers to discover what a person’s true motives are. In fact,political leadersacttoacquireandmaintainpowerforthemselves.But ifa leaderactstomaintainastatethatprotectsthelivesandpropertyofhissubjectsorfellowcitizensfromexternalaggressionanddomesticcrime,theywillbelievehimwhenhedeclaresthathehasbeenactingforthecommongood.Inotherwords,peoplejudgealeader’scharacterandwordsbytheeffectsofhisdeeds.Thatisthe‘effectualtruth’thatMachiavelliseeksinThePrince.

Machiavelli’sredefinitionofthetrue‘virtues’ofarulerobviouslyconstitutesaseveredebunkingofboth‘virtue’and‘rule’.Ratherthananobleendeavorundertakenfroma senseof duty to achieve a commongood, effective rulewill beundertakenandconductedsolelybasedonaclevercalculationofthebestmeansanambitiousmancanusetosatisfyhisdesiretocommandwithoutbecominghatedandsopossiblyoverthrown.However,Machiavellialsoshowsthatthereis–or,atleastthattherecanbe–acertainconjunctionoftheprince’sdesiretocommandandthepeople’sdesiretobesecure,eventhoughthesedesiresremainessentiallyopposed,butitrequiresgreatingenuitytoconceiveofhowbothcanbesatisfiedtoacertainextent.InThePrince,hepointstoonewayofdoingthisbyremindinghisreaderthattherearetwo


18

waysoffighting–thehumanwaywithlaws,andthebestialwaywithforceandfraud.He indicates what he means by the human way of fighting with laws when heobservesthatFranceisanexampleofawell-orderedandgovernedkingdom,andthatthefirstofthe‘infinitegoodinstitutionsonwhichthelibertyandsecurityofthe[French]kingdepend…isParlement’.ThisFrenchcourtenabledthepeopletoresistthe ambition and insolence of the nobles by accusing and trying them of crimesagainsttheking.Parlementthuscontributednotonlytothesecurityofthepeople,butalsotothesecurityoftheking.Inamonarchy,thelawsarethelawsoftheking;andthosewhohavethepowertothreatenhisrulearethenoblesor‘great’whoseethemselves as equals to the king and continually try to acquiremorewealth andpowerforthemselves,ifnotsimplytoreplacehim.Bygivingthepeoplethepowertocheck thearroganceandambitionof thenobles, the institutionofsuchacourtenabledthekingtousethepeopleasameansofsecuringhisrulewithouthishavingto act directly or with force against the nobility. Just as Borgia brought goodgovernmenttotheRomagnabyusingacrueladministratortofrighteneveryoneintosubmission,andthenavoidedresponsibilityhimselffortheuseofsuchcruelmeansby replacing his assistant with a civil court, so, Machiavelli suggests, the king ofFrancehasactedbothtosecurehisownruleandtoescapeblameforthemeansbysettingupacourtinwhichthepeoplejudgethenobles.

InThePrince,Machiavellithusseekstopersuadehispoliticallyambitiousreaderstoinstitutewhatwehave come toknowasa ‘constitutionalmonarchy’, basedonanarmycomposedoftheirownpeople,andcharacterizedbyabalanceofpowersthatsecurestheruleoflaw.Becausesuchanation-statecouldbeestablishedonlyinarelativelylargeterritory,MachiavelliconcludesThePrincewithacalltotheMedicitomusterandtrainanarmy‘toseizeItalyandtofreeherfromthebarbarians’.

WhatMachiavellidoesnotmention inThePrince, butwhathe statesexplicitly inhisDiscourses,isthatayoungvirtuouspoliticalleaderattheheadofacitizenarmy,whoseeksandacquirespopularsupportthewayMachiavelliarguesthata‘prince’should, constitutes thegreatest threat to thepreservationof a republic.Ordinarypeopledonotperceivetheseedsoftyrannythatareconcealedbythefavorsthatapopular leader does for them.Happy to see such a popular leader put down the‘great’whohavelordedovertheminthepast,thepeopleareoftenwillingtoseealeader (such as Venezuela’s former president Hugo Chávez, say) abolish the


19

constitutionalchecksorrestraintsthatpreventanysingleindividualfrombecomingatyrant.So,whereasinThePrinceMachiavelliadvocatesakindofalliancebetweentheprinceandthepeopletokeepthegreat incheck,intheDiscoursesheseekstocreateakindofalliancebetweentheother‘great’menandthepeopleagainstanyemergingprinceortyrant.

The‘remedies’thatMachiavelliproposestocounterthethreatthatapopularleaderposes to a republic are to make both the people and other ambitious citizenssuspiciousofthemotivesandambitionofseeminglyvirtuousyoungleaders.Inotherwords,heurgesthemnottobetakeninbythe‘appearance’ofreligion,mercyandhumanity that hehimself advised a ‘prince’ to project. Instead, thepeople shouldsuspect that their ‘captains’ have more dangerous hidden ambitions. He alsocounselsotherambitiousor‘great’citizenstocompetewithemergingyoungheroesforpopularfavor.Toensurethatthereisrotationinofficeandthattermlimitsarerespected,ambitiouscitizensmustbewillingnotonlytocedeofficestheyhaveheldtotheircompetitors,butalsotoserveunderthem.Andtoexposeattemptsonthepartofambitiousindividualstooverthrowtherepublic,itisnecessarytoinstituteprocedureswherebysuchindividualscanbeaccusedandtriedbeforelargepopularjuries.Thesetrialswillnotnecessarilyproducejusticefortheindividualsinquestion,but thedangerof facingsucha trialwill serveasa checkon individualambition.Indeed,thetrialsthemselvesallowthepeopleto‘vent…thosehumorsthatgrowupincities’.Unorganized‘spontaneous’popularresistancetotheoppressivedesiresofthe‘great’isnotsufficienttocheckthem,Machiavelliemphasizes.Theblindfuryofamobcanbeimmenselydestructive,but itsoonsubsidesandthushasnolastingpositiveeffect.Ittakesasinglemindtodesigninstitutions,andasingleleadertoarmandorganizeaneffectiveforcecapableofdefendingacityfromexternalaggressionandmaintainingorderinsideit.Thegreatadvantageofrepublicsoverprincipalitiesisnotthattheydonotrequire‘princes’orleaders;itisthattheyarenotstuckwithone.Theycanelectasuccessionofdifferent individualsable toact inavarietyofcircumstances.

WhydoesMachiavellithinkthatrepublicsarebetterthan‘principalities’,theruleofoneman?Inproperlystructuredrepublicswherepeoplefeelsecureintheirlives,familiesandproperty,bothindividualsandthecommunitygrowandprosper:

Largerpeoplesareseenthere,becausemarriagesarefreerandmoredesirable


20

tomensinceeachwillinglyprocreatesthosechildrenhebelieveshecannourish.Hedoesnotfearthathispatrimonywillbetakenaway,andheknowsnotonlythattheyarebornfreeandnotslaves,butthattheycan,throughtheirownvirtue,becomesprinces.Richesareseentomultiplythereinlargernumber,boththosethatcomefromagricultureandthosethatcomefromthearts.Foreachwillingly… seeks to acquire those goods he believes he can enjoy once acquired. Fromwhichitarisesthatmeninrivalrythinkofprivateandpublicadvantages,andboth…growmarvelously.

Themaincriterionbywhichgovernmentsshouldbejudgedtobegoodorbadisnotthemoralcharacteror intelligenceof thepersonorpersonswhorule. It isratherthecommongood that results froma government that secures the lives, families,liberty and property of its citizens. Machiavelli thus advocates a thoroughlydemocraticpurposeforgovernment.Buthedoesnotthinkthatpurelydemocraticprocessesormeansarealwaysthebestorevenadequatewaysofachievingthatend.Leaderswhounderstand that thebestway to fulfil their owndesire to rule is tosatisfythedesiresoftheirpeopleforsecurity,prosperityandadvancementarealsoneeded. Because all effective political action requires organization and thusleadership,Machiavelliaddressesallhispoliticalwritingstoindividualsinpositionsofpowerorambitioustoholdthem.But inurgingthemto instituteandmaintain‘goodgovernment’bysecuringthelives,familiesandpropertiesoftheirsubjectsorfellow citizens, he does not appeal to their sense of justice, mercy or public-spiritedness.Onthecontrary,heappealstotheirambition–theirhumandesireforstatusandwealth.Machiavelli’sdebunkingoftraditionalnotionsofvirtueandvicewasthereforeanecessarypartofhisbroadercontentionthatgovernmentshouldnotservetheinterestsofthefewbest,butthatitshouldservethemoremodestdesiresof themany.Hedoesnot expectordinarypeople tounderstand the intricaciesofmilitary strategy or institutional design –that is, themeans bywhich their basicdesirescanbesatisfied.Heiscertain,however,thattheyarethebestjudgesoftheoutcomesoreffects.


21

Religion, Morality & Politics Inthe16thcentury,MachiavelliwasdenouncedasanapostleoftheDevil,whilesomeappliedhisdoctrineofragiondistato(raisond’état,reasonofstate).Thefrequentpoint of contention was his attitude toward conventional moral and religiousstandards;histeachingadoptsthestanceofimmoralismor,atleast,amoralism.Evenrecently–e.g.LeoStrauss(1957)-heisa“teacherofevil,”sincehecounselsleaderstoavoidjustice,mercy,temperance,wisdom,andloveoftheirpeople,andinsteadusecruelty,violence,fear,anddeception.Machiavellicouldbesimplya“realist”ora“pragmatist”advocatingthesuspensionofcommonplaceethicsinmattersofpolitics;Machiavellisimplyadoptsthestanceofascientist-akindof“Galileoofpolitics”-indistinguishingbetweenthe“facts”ofpoliticallifeandthe“values”ofmoraljudgment.

Thus, Machiavelli lays claim to the mantle of the founder of “modern” politicalscience, vs. Aristotle's classical norm-laden vision of a political science of virtue.Machiavelliprefersconformitytomoralvirtueceterisparibus.

Jean-JacquesRousseau,longago,heldthatthereallessonofIlPrincipeistoteachthepeoplethetruthabouthowprincesbehaveandthustoexpose,ratherthancelebrate,theimmoralityatthecoreofone-manrule.WhilesomecontemporaryscholarshavepronouncedMachiavellithesupremesatirist,pointingoutthefoiblesofprincesandtheiradvisors,thefactthatMachiavellilaterwrotebitingpopularstagecomediesiscitedasevidenceinsupportofhisstrongsatiricalbent.Thus,weshouldtakenothingMachiavellisaysaboutmoralconductatfacevalue,butinsteadtakehisremarksassharplyhumorouscommentaryonpublicaffairs.

MachiavelliwasnofriendoftheinstitutionalizedChristianChurchasheknewit.TheDiscorsimakes clear that conventional Christianity saps from humans the vigorrequiredforactivecivillife.AndIlPrincipespeakswithdisdainandadmirationaboutthecontemporaryconditionoftheChurchanditsPope.Manyhaveaccusedhimofbeing profoundly anti-Christian, preferring the pagan civil religions of ancientsocietiessuchasRome,regardedtobemoresuitableforacityendowedwithvirtù.Butforothershewasamanofconventional-ifunenthusiastic-piety,preparedtobowtotheexternalitiesofworship,notdeeplydevotedineithersoulormindtothetenetsofChristianfaith.


22

Buton31October1517,MartinLuthernailedhisNinety-FiveThesestothedoorofAllSaints’ChurchinWittenberg–andChristianitywouldneverbethesame‘Papacy-runCatholicchurch’.

Machiavellihasbeencreditedwithformulatingforthefirsttimethe“modernconceptof the state”. The term lo stato appearswidely in Il Principe in a coercive sense,distinct fromtheLatintermstatus.Machiavelli'snameanddoctrineswerewidelyinvokedtojustifythepriorityoftheinterestsofthestateintheageofabsolutism.

Yet a careful reading of Machiavelli's use of lo stato does not support thisinterpretation;his“state”remainsapersonalpatrimony,apossessionmoreinlinewith the medieval conception of dominium as the foundation of rule (meaning“privateproperty”and“politicaldominion.”)Thus,the“state”isliterallyownedbywhichever prince happens to have control of it. Moreover, the character ofgovernanceisdeterminedbythepersonalqualitiesandtraitsoftheruler-hence,hissemphasisonvirtùas indispensable for theprince's success.To “maintainhisstate,”hecanonlyrelyuponhisownfountofpersonalcharacteristicstodirecttheuseofpowerandestablishhisclaimonrulership.Thisisaprecariousposition,sinceMachiavelli insists that the throes of fortune and the conspiracies of other menrendertheprinceconstantlyvulnerabletothelossofhisstate.Theideaofastableconstitutional regime that reflects the tenor of modern political thought (andpractice)isnowheretobeseeninMachiavelli'sconceptionofprincelygovernment.Indeed,onemightwonderwhetherMachiavelli,forallhisallegedrealism,believedthataprinceofcompletevirtùcould in factexist.Flexibilityyieldsthecoreof the“practical”advicethatMachiavelliofferstotherulerseekingtomaintainhisstate:excludenocourseofactionoutofhand,butbereadyalwaystoperformwhateveractsarerequiredbypoliticalcircumstance.


23

Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio (Discourses on Titus Livy)

The“DiscoursesontheTenBooksofTitusLivy”perhapsmosthonestlyexpressesMachiavelli's personal political beliefs and commitments, in his republicansympathies.TheDiscorsidrawupon thesamereservoirof languageandconceptsthat fed Il Principe; across the two works, Machiavelli distinguishes between aminimal and a full conception of “political” or “civil” order, and constructs ahierarchy of ends within his general account of communal life. A minimalconstitutionalorderisoneinwhichsubjectslivesecurely(viveresicuro),ruledbya


24

stronggovernmentwhichholdsinchecktheaspirationsofbothnobilityandpeople,but is in turn balanced by other legal and institutional mechanisms. In a fullyconstitutionalregime,thegoalofthepoliticalorderisthefreedomofthecommunity(vivere libero),createdby theactiveparticipationof,andcontentionbetween, thenobility and thepeople. Liberty formsa value that anchorsMachiavelli'spoliticaltheoryandguideshisevaluationsof theworthinessofdifferent typesof regimes.Only inarepublic, forwhichMachiavelliexpressesadistinctpreference,maythisgoalbeattained.

DuringhiscareerasasecretaryanddiplomatintheFlorentinerepublic,MachiavellicametoacquirevastexperienceoftheinnerworkingsofFrenchgovernment,whichbecamehismodelforthe“secure”(butnotfree)polity.

HedevotesagreatdealofattentiontoFranceintheDiscorsi.

Why would Machiavelli effusively praise a hereditary monarchy in a worksupposedlydesignedtopromotethesuperiorityofrepublics?Hewantstocontrastthebest-casescenarioofamonarchicregimewiththeinstitutionsandorganizationofarepublic.Eventhemostexcellentmonarchylackscertainsalientqualitiesthatareendemictoproperlyconstitutedrepublicangovernment,andthatmakethelatterconstitutionmoredesirablethantheformer.

He asserts that the greatest virtue of the French kingdom and its king is thededicationtolaw:ThekingdomofFranceismoderatedmorebylawsthananyotherkingdomofwhichatourtimewehaveknowledge.

Toexplain this situationMachiavelli refers to the functionof theParlement: “ThekingdomofFrancelivesunderlawsandordersmorethananyotherkingdom.TheselawsandordersaremaintainedbyParlements,notably thatofParis:by it theyarerenewedanytimeitactsagainstaprinceofthekingdomorinitssentencescondemnstheking.Anduptonowithasmaintaineditselfbyhavingbeenapersistentexecutoragainstthatnobility.”

Specifically,theFrenchkingandthenobles,whosepowerissuchthattheywouldbeable to oppress the populace, are checked by the laws of the realm which areenforced by the independent authority of the Parlement. Thus, opportunities forunbridled tyrannical conduct are largely eliminated, rendering the monarchytemperateand“civil.”


25

Yet such a regime, no matter how well ordered and law-abiding, remainsincompatiblewithviverelibero:“asfarasthe…populardesireofrecoveringtheirliberty,theprince,notbeingabletosatisfythem,mustexaminewhatthereasonsarethatmakethemdesirebeingfree.”Onlyafewindividualswantfreedomsimplytocommand others; these are of sufficiently small number that they can either beeradicated or bought off with honors. By contrast, the clear majority of peopleconfuselibertywithsecurity,imaginingthattheformerisidenticaltothelatter:“Butall the others, who are infinite, desire liberty to live securely (vivere sicuro).Althoughthekingcannotgivesuchlibertytothemasses,hecanprovidethesecuritythattheycrave;asfortherest,forwhomitisenoughtolivesecurely(viveresicuro),theyareeasilysatisfiedbymakingordersandlawsthat,alongwiththepoweroftheking,comprehendeveryone'ssecurity.Andonceaprincedoesthis,andthepeopleseethatheneverbreakssuchlaws,theywillshortlybegintolivesecurely(viveresicuro)andcontentedly.”

Thelaw-abidingcharacteroftheFrenchregimeensuressecurity,butthatsecurityoughtnevertobeconfusedwithliberty.Thisisthelimitofmonarchicrule:eventhebestkingdomcandonobetterthantoguaranteetoitspeopletranquilandorderlygovernment.Hecommentsthatregardlessof“howgreathiskingdomis,”thekingofFrance(aswellasthePopeetal)“livesasatributary”toforeignmercenaries.“Thisall comes from having disarmed his people and having preferred … to enjoy theimmediateprofit of beingable toplunder thepeopleandof avoidingan imaginaryratherthanarealdanger,insteadofdoingthingsthatwouldassurethemandmaketheirstatesperpetuallyhappy.Thisdisorder,ifitproducessomequiettimes,isintimethecauseofstraitenedcircumstances,damageandirreparableruin.”

Astatethatmakessecurityaprioritycannotaffordtoarmitspopulace,forfearthatthemasseswill employ theirweaponsagainst thenobility -or thecrown.Sucharegimeisweakenedirredeemably,sinceitmustdependuponforeignerstofightonitsbehalf.Inthissense,anygovernmentthattakesviveresicuroasitsgoalgeneratesapassiveandimpotentpopulaceasaninescapableresult.

Morecrucially,Machiavellibelieves,aweapons-bearingcitizenmilitiaremainstheultimateassurancethatneitherthegovernmentnorsomeusurperwilltyrannizethepopulace. “So Rome was free four hundred years and was armed; Sparta, eighthundred; many other cities have been unarmed and free less than forty years”.


26

[ThismighthaveinspiredtheSecondAmendmenttotheUSConstitution].

Citizens will always fight for their liberty - against internal as well as externaloppressors.Therefore,successiveFrenchmonarchshavelefttheirpeopledisarmed:they sought to maintain public security and order, which for them meant theeliminationofanyopportunitiesfortheirsubjectstowieldarms.TheFrenchregime,becauseitseekssecurityaboveallelsecannotpermitwhatMachiavellitakestobeaprimarymeansofpromotingliberty.

Bycontrast,inafullydevelopedrepublicsuchasRome's,wheretheactualizationofliberty is paramount, both thepeople and thenobility take an active role in self-government.“TomethosewhocondemnthetumultsbetweentheNoblesandthePlebsseemtobecavilingattheverythingthatwastheprimarycauseofRome'sretentionofliberty…. And they do not realize that in every republic there are two differentdispositions, that of the people and that of the great men, and that all legislationfavoringlibertyisbroughtaboutbytheirdissension”.

Machiavellitrustedthepeopleforpromotionofcommunalliberty.IntheDiscorsi,heascribestothemassesanextensivecompetencetojudgeandactforthepublicgood,contrasting the “prudence and stability” of ordinary citizens with the unsounddiscretionoftheprince:“Apeopleismoreprudent,morestable,andofbetterjudgmentthana prince”.Hemaintains that the people aremore concerned about, andmorewillingtodefend,libertythaneitherprincesornobles…themassesaremoreconcernedwithprotecting themselvesagainst oppressionand consider themselves “free”whentheyarenotabusedbythemorepowerfulorthreatenedwithsuchabuse.Inturn,whentheyfeartheonsetofsuchoppression,ordinarycitizensaremoreinclinedtoobjectandtodefendthecommonliberty.

Suchanactiveroleforthepeople,whilenecessaryforthemaintenanceofvitalpublicliberty,isfundamentallyantitheticaltothehierarchicalstructureofsubordination-and-ruleonwhichmonarchicviveresicurorests.Thepreconditionsofvivereliberosimplydonotfavorthesecuritythatistheaimofconstitutionalmonarchy.

Machiavelli'spraisefortheroleofthepeopleinsecuringtherepublicissupportedby his confidence in the generally illuminating effects of public speech upon thecitizenbody.NearthebeginningofthefirstDiscorso,henotesthatsomemayobjecttotheextensivefreedomenjoyedbytheRomanpeopletoassemble,toprotest, and


27

tovetolawsandpolicies;herespondsthat“theRomanscouldmaintainlibertyandorderbecauseofthepeople'sabilitytodiscernthecommongoodwhenitwasshowntothem”.

ThereferencetoCicero(oneofthefewintheDiscorsi)confirmsthatMachiavellihasinmindakey featureof classical republicanism: thecompetenceof thepeople torespondtoandsupportthewordsofthegiftedoratorwhenhespeakstrulyaboutthepublicwelfare.Citingtheformula“voxpopuli,voxdei”,Machiavelli insiststhatpublicopinionisremarkablyaccurateinitsprognostications:“whentwospeakersofequalskillareheardadvocatingdifferentalternatives,veryrarelydoesone findthepeoplefailingtoadoptthebettervieworincapableofappreciatingthetruthofwhatithears.”

Thepeopleareinfactbetterqualifiedtomakedecisionsthanareprinces:“thepeoplecanneverbepersuadedthat it isgoodtoappointtoanofficeamanof infamousorcorrupthabits,whereasaprincemayeasilyandinavastvarietyofwaysbepersuadedtodothis.”Likewise,shouldthepeopledepartfromthelaw-abidingpath,theymayreadilybeconvincedtorestoreorder:“Foranuncontrolledandtumultuouspeoplecanbespokentobyagoodmanandeasilyledbackintoagoodway.Butnoonecanspeak toawickedprince, and theonly remedy is steel….To cure themaladyof thepeoplewordsareenough”.Thecontrasthedrawsisstark:therepublicgovernedbywords and persuasion –i.e. ruled by public speech- is almost sure to realize thecommon good of its citizens; and even should it err, recourse is always open tofurtherdiscourse.Non-republicanregimes,becausetheyexcludeorlimitdiscursivepractices,ultimately restuponcoercivedominationandcanonlybe correctedbyviolentmeans.

Machiavellithusseemstoadheretoagenuinelyrepublicanposition.Buthowcanwesquare this with his statements in Il Principe? Machiavelli never repudiated IlPrincipe,andreferstoitintheDiscorsi:heviewedtheformerasacompaniontothelatter.

WasMachiavellitrulyafriendofprincesandtyrantsorofrepublics?Thequestionseemsirresolvable.


28

Machiavelli Before, Later and Today Whatis“modern”or“original”inMachiavelli'sthought?WhatisMachiavelli's“place”inthehistoryofWesternideas?

Muchlikeadragon,“therulerofmenhasbristlingscales.Onlyifaspeakercanavoidbrushingagainstthemcanhehaveanyhopeofsuccess.”

That,atleast,isthedilemmafacingChinesestatesmenasdescribedbytheancientphilosopherHanFeiZi韓非(280-233BCE).Officiallyrepudiated–butstillinfluential–throughoutChina’s2000+yearsofimperialrule,heandhis“LegalistSchool”havegainednewprominencerecentlyduetofavorablecitationsbyPRCleaders.Aboveall, those include referencesmadebyPresidentXi Jinping,China’smostpowerfulrulerindecades.Farfrommerecasualremarks,suchstatementsserveasideologicalguidepoststodeterminetheCommunistPartyline.JustonesentenceofHanFeiZi’sthatXiquotedlastautumn,forexample,subsequentlyappearedthousandsoftimesinofficialChinesemediaatthelocal,provincial,andnationallevels.

Unliketheotherfamedphilosophersofthetime,HanFei(Zi=Master)wasamemberoftherulingaristocracy,havingbeenbornintotherulingfamilyofthestateofHanduringtheendphaseoftheWarringStatesperiod.Inthiscontext,hisworkshavebeeninterpretedbysomescholarsasbeingdirectedtohiscousin,theKingofHan.SimaQian’sShijisaysthatHanFeistudiedtogetherwithfutureQinchancellorLiSi


29

undertheConfucianphilosopherXunzi.Itissaidthatbecauseofhisstutter,HanFeicouldnotproperlypresenthisideasincourt.Hisadviceotherwisebeingignored,butobservingtheslowdeclineofhisHanstate,hedeveloped"oneofthemostbrilliant(writing)stylesinancientChina."

SimaQian’sbiographyofHanFeiisasfollows:"HanFeiwasaprinceofHan,infavorofthestudyofname/formandlaw/artwhichtakesitsrootintheHuang-Laophilosophy.Hewasbornastuttererandwasnotabletodisputewell,buthewasgoodatwritingpapers.Togetherwithhis friend,LiSi,heservedXunQing,andSihimselfadmittedthathewasnotascompetentasFei.SeeingHanwasonthedecline,heoftenremonstratedwiththekingofHanbysubmittingpapers,butthekingdidnotagreetoemployhim.Atthis,HanFeiwasfrustratedwiththerealitythat,ingoverningastate,the king did not endeavor to refine and clarify the juridical system of the state, tocontrolhissubjectsbytakingoverpower,toenhancestatepropertyanddefense,ortocallandemploythewisebyenhancingthestate.

Rather, the king employed the corrupted and treacherous and put them in higherpositionsoverthewise.HeregardedtheintellectualsasadisturbancetotheLawbyemployingtheirliterature,andthoughtthatknightsviolatetheprohibitionofthestatebyusingarmed forces.While thestatewas inpeace, theking liked topatronize thehonored;whileinneed,heemployedwarriorswitharmorandhelmet.So,thecultivatedmencouldnotbeemployedandthemenemployedcouldnotbecultivated.Severelydistressed over the reality that men of high integrity and uprightness were notembracedbythesubjectswithimmoralityandcorruption,heobservedthechangesinthegainingandlosingofthepast.Therefore,hewroteseveralpaperslikeGuFen,WuTan,Nei-WaiChu,ShouLin,andSheiNan,whichamount toonehundred thousandwords.However,whileHanFeihimselfknewwellof thedifficultyofpersuasionandcreatedthedetailedwriting,SheiNan,heeventuallykilledhimselfatQin.Hecouldnotescapethetrapofwordsforhimself."

His works ultimately ended up in the hands of the thrilled Qin king. Qin kingcommented"IfIcanmakefriendwiththisperson(HanFei),Imaydiewithoutregrets."andinvitedHanFeitoQin.HanFeipresentedtheessay"PreservingtheHan"toaskQinkingnottoattackhishomeland,buthisex-friendandrivalLiSi-whowasjealousofHanFei-usedthatessaytoconvincetoimprisonHanFeibecausehislikelyloyaltyto Han. Han Fei responded by writing another essay named "In the first time of


30

meetingQinking",hopingtousehiswritingtalenttowintheking'sheart.HanFeididwintheking'sheart,butnotbeforeLiSiforcedhimtocommitsuicidebydrinkingpoison.TheQinkinglaterregrettedabouttheunfortunatedeathofHanFei.

Xunzi formed the hypothesis that human nature is evil, virtueless and suggestedhumaninfantsmustbebroughttotheirvirtuousformthroughsocial-class-orientedConfucianmoraleducation.Withoutsuch,Xunziargued,manwouldactvirtuelesslyand be steered by his own human nature to commit immoral acts. Han Fei'seducationandlifeexperienceduringtheWarringStatesperiod,andinhisownHanstate,contributedhissynthesisofaphilosophyforthemanagementofanamoralandinterest-drivenadministration,towhichmoralityseemedalooseandinefficienttool.Han agreedwith his teacher's theory of "virtueless by birth", but as in previousLegalistphilosophy,pragmaticallyproposedtosteerpeoplebytheirowninterest-drivennature.Whilemanyexpertswouldagreewiththatcharacterization,evenreferringtoHanFeiZias“China’sMachiavelli,”othersseehim,andLegalist thought ingeneral, inmorepositiveterms.Scholarscredit“pragmatic”LegalistthoughtasbeingbehindbothmuchofChina’shistoricalsuccessanditsongoingrebirthasagreatnation.ForConfucians,who focuson idealsof loyalty, righteousness, andbenevolence, littlecould bemore repugnant than the Legalist position that “if awise rulermasterswealthandpower,hecanhavewhateverhedesires.”

YetHan Fei ZI’s ideas, and Xi Jinping’s uses of them, are far frommere illiberalposturing.EventheremarkswereawarningbyXitothecountry’shighlevelpoliticalleadersthat“whenthosewhoupholdthelawarestrong,thestateisstrong.Whentheyareweak,thestateisweak.”Thestatementisatoncestriking,suggestive,andhighlyambiguous.In this sense, Xi’s use of ancient scholarship resembles the other activitiescharacteristic of his unique administration. Observers are divided on how tointerpret his high-intensity crackdown on corruption, nearly unprecedentedpersonalpopularity,andhigh-profilereformsaimingfor“theruleoflaw.”Thus,hisuseof reformist-sounding languagecanbemore thanenough topromptguardedoptimism among observers both domestic and foreign. Other analysts, however,remainhighlyskeptical;pointingtoseveralotherstatementswhereXivowstocrushdissent,resisttheWest,andensureideologicalunity.


31

Yet people on both sides admit thatwhile China’s fate increasingly turns on thethoughtsandbeliefsofoneman,thereisnoclearconsensusonwhatthatmanthinksorbelieves.ThatiswhythemostvaluableinsighttogainfromhisLegalistreferencesmay relate to a more basic question. What can Xi’s many prominent politicalpronouncementsrevealabouthispoliticalbeliefs?

Onthistopic,HanFeiZI’soverallpragmaticapproachbeginsthemomentanaspiringpolitician opens his mouth to speak. Like Machiavelli in the West, he lived in adangerouspoliticalclimatewhereawrongwordcouldresult indisgrace,exile,orworse.Asheexplicitlystatedinhiswriting,thefirsttaskofanypoliticaltheorististo avoid getting on his prince’s bad side; or “brushing against the ruler’s scales.”Discretion,andsubtlety,arethekeytoachievinginfluence.Ideals,andmorals,aretobekeptprivate.

Based on that perspective, if Xi is especially influenced by the Legalist School, itmeans two important things for his future trajectory. First, neither his calls forreformnorhisilliberalpronouncementsshouldbetakenassimplestatementsaboutwhathebelieves.Instead,heislikelyusingdifferentformsofcompromiselanguagethat various factions can agree upon. Xi’s patchwork political platform will bemaintaininghisownplaceofauthority,largelybyavoidingthepotentialwrathoftheCommunistParty’seldersandmanyeliteinterestgroups:the“dragon”whosescalesherisksrubbingthewrongway.

Secondly,asarulerXi’ssignatureinitiatives–especiallyhisdramaticandescalatingcrackdownonofficialcorruption–probablydonotreflecteitherhighidealismoramerepowergrab.Xiundoubtedlydoeshaveavisionforwherehewantstotakehiscountry,hisown“ChineseDream,”butheisunlikelytobesofoolishastotrytorealizethatdreamtooearly.Toachievehisgoals,XiJinpingfirstmust“masterwealthandpower,”andarobust,predictablelegalsystemisonekeytosuchmastery.ItissimplybesidethepointtoaskwhetherXiintendsfor“theruleoflaw”tolimittheParty’sauthority,orhisownastheParty’srepresentative.Verypragmatically–verymuchlikeaLegalist–Xiislookingforformulasthatcanachievehisgoalsforthenation.Fornow,thewealthofcorruptofficialsmustbeseized,andthepowerofelitesoverthelawmustbeabolished.Itdoesn’tmuchmatterwhetherthatprocessiscalledliberalorconservative,leftorright,traditionalormodern.Whatmatters,atleastforthemoment,iswhetherornotitworks.HanFeiZi,theChineseLegalist


32

philosopher,andNiccolòMachiavellibothwrotetreatisesadvisingrulersonhowtoacquireandmaintainpoliticalpower.Theirviews areremarkablysimilar,thoughwrittenmorethansixteenhundredyearsandseveral thousandmiles apart. Bothmen advocated cunning and ruthlessness, and both held that the rulermust actoutsidethestandardmoralityoftheirsocietytomaintainpower:theabuseofpowerisnotrestrictedtoanysinglecultureorcivilization.

NowwearewatchingtheChinesediscipleofHanFeiTzufacingacertainDonaldJ.Trump–whoneverreadMachiavelli.

Indeed,mayyouliveininterestingtimes…

Machiavelli, not being in power,was in a sense trapped between innovation andtradition, betweenvia antiquaandviamoderna, in away that generated internalconceptualtensionswithinhisthoughtandevenwithinindividualtexts.Despitehisrepeated assertion of his own originality, his careful attention to preexistingtraditionsmeant that hewas never fully able to escape his intellectual confines;Machiavellioughtnottobeclassifiedaseitherpurelyan“ancient”ora“modern,”butinsteaddeservestobeintheintersticesbetweenthetwo.

ButMachiavelli’s ideashadaprofound impactonpolitical leaders throughout themodernWest,helpedinitiallybythenewtechnologyoftheprintingpress.Duringthe first generations afterMachiavelli, hismain influencewas in non-Republicangovernments:ThePrincewasspokenofhighlybyThomasCromwellinEnglandandinfluencedHenryVIIIinhisturntowardsProtestantism.

InFrance,MachiavellicametobeassociatedwithCatherinade'MediciandtheSt.Bartholomew’sDaymassacre.

InnocentGentillet–aHuguenot-publishedin1576,inGeneva,an‘Anti-Machiavel’inwhichheaccusedMachiavelliofbeinganatheist,andaccusedpoliticiansofhistimebysayingthathisworkswerethe“Koranofthecourtiers”,thatheisofnoreputationinthecourtofFrancewhichhathnotMachiavel’swritingsatthefingersends;healsoquestionedtheeffectivenessofimmoralstrategies(justasMachiavellihadhimselfdone!)

Other authors criticized Machiavelli, but also followed him in many ways. Theyacceptedtheneedforaprincetobeconcernedwithreputation,andevenaneedforcunninganddeceit.


33

FrancisBaconarguedthecaseforwhatwouldbecomemodernsciencewhichwouldbebasedmoreuponrealexperienceandexperimentation, free fromassumptionsaboutmetaphysics,andaimedatincreasingcontrolofnature.HenamedMachiavelliasapredecessor.

Heisalsothoughttohavebeenaninfluenceforothermajorphilosophers,suchasMontaigne, Descartes, Hobbes, and Montesquieu. Jean-Jacques Rousseau viewedMachiavelli’sworkasasatiricalpiece inwhichMachiavelliexposesthefaultsofaone-manruleratherthanexaltingamorality.

MachiavellihadamajorindirectanddirectinfluenceuponthepoliticalthinkingoftheFounding Fathersof the United States due to his overwhelming favoritism ofrepublicanismandtherepublictypeofgovernment.

Benjamin Franklin, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson followed Machiavelli’srepublicanismwhentheyopposedwhattheysawastheemergingaristocracythatthey fearedAlexanderHamiltonwas creatingwith theFederalistParty.HamiltonlearnedfromMachiavelliabouttheimportanceofforeignpolicyfordomesticpolicy-butmayhavebrokenfromhimregardinghowrapaciousarepublicneededtobetosurvive.

But the Founding Fatherwho perhapsmost studied and valuedMachiavelli as a


34

political philosopherwas JohnAdams,whoprofusely commentedon the Italian’sthoughtinhiswork,ADefenseoftheConstitutionsofGovernmentoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica.ForAdams,Machiavellirestoredempiricalreasontopolitics,whilehisanalysisoffactionswascommendable.AdamslikewiseagreedwiththeFlorentinethathumannaturewasimmutableanddrivenbypassions.HealsoacceptedMachiavelli’sbeliefthatallsocietiesweresubjecttocyclicalperiodsofgrowthanddecay.

The20th-centuryItalianCommunistAntonioGramscidrewgreatinspirationfromMachiavelli’s writings on ethics, morals, and how they relate to the State andrevolution in hiswritings on rivoluzione passive (passive revolution), andhowasocietycanbemanipulatedbycontrollingpopularnotionsofmorality.JosephStalinreadIlPrincipeandannotatedhisowncopy.

IwonderifStephenK.“Steve”BannoneverreadMachiavelli…(andwasinspiredbythiseventualexercise).

Machiavelli(orMussolini,orBerlusconi,orevenDonaldJ.Trump)maydefineorholdpower.

Butintheend,Verdialwayswins:‘Va,pensiero, sull'alidorate;va, tiposa suiclivi,suicolli.’-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laSuOwGgVvQ.


35

Postscript MyessayonNicolòMachiavelliwaswritteninApril2017.InMay2017,asmallbook(148 pages; ~35,000 words) was published in French by EquateursParallèles/France Inter: Un été avec Machiavel (A Summer with Machiavel) byPatrickBoucheron,

Patrick Boucheron holds the Chair of History at the Collège de France, themostprestigiousFrenchInstitution*.Hewasbornin1965,andhaschanged–forthemuchbetter-thewayweshouldthinkofandreadaboutHistory.**

Hisstyleiscatchy,rousingandirresistible.Hiseruditionunbeatable.HishasreadallandeverythingaboutMachiavelli,anddecidedtospeakofMachiavelli,onceaweek,onFrance-Inter,theFrenchNPR,duringthesummerof2016.LastApril,heedited,thengotthemanuscriptpublished,andVoilà!,wearejoiningasarabandafuriosa.

In his Dictionnaire (1863-1873), Emile Littré describes a Machiavel as anyunscrupulousstatesman.AtthesametimeGustaveFlaubertwroteinhisDictionnairedesidéesreçuesetCataloguedesidéeschics(Dictionaryofacceptedideasandcatalogof chic ideas) Machiavel. Ne pas l’avoir lu, mais le regarder comme un scélérat(Machiavel.Neverhavereadhim,butseeinghimasascoundrel).Infact,mostwritersdealingwithMachiavelli,propagateanignorant,ready-made,nevercheckedopiniononafabricatedidea:theignobleMachiavellism.

ThebookthatNicolòMachiavellireadandthen,fordaysandnight,copiedbeforehewasthirty,isDererumnatura(OntheNatureofThings)bytheRomanpoetLucretius(99-55BCE) inwhich Lucretius presents the principles of atomism –and not the“divine intervention”, and more importantly, with his physicalistic universe,postulates a nondeterministic tendency for atoms to swerve randomly (Latin:clinamen) [Quantum Physics???]. This book changed forever the thinking ofMachiavelli.Itchangedhislife.

WhatI–asmanyMachiavellischolars-failedtomentionisthatthetitleMachiavellihadchosenforhisthinbook(thatbecamehisopusmagnum)wasnotIlPrincipe(ThePrince)butDePrincipatibus(OfPrincipalities).ThetitleweknowwasthechoiceofAntonio Baldo,who, guardedly, published themasterpiece/rant posthumously in1532.


36

PatrickBoucheronmakesastrikingparallelbetweenMachiavelli’sIlPrincipe(asweknowit)andMarcBloch’sÉtrangeDéfaite(StrangeDefeat)writtenin1940inwhichhestates,aboutthecauseofthedisasteratthestartofWWII"...whateverthedeep-seated cause of the disastermay have been, the immediate occasionwas the utterincompetenceoftheHighCommand."MachiavelliwritesthattheItalianPrincipalitiesdidnotcopewiththefuriafrancesaoftheTransalpinemercenaries.

AsPatrickBoucheronsummarizes,politics’goalistohavethepopulaceunderorder.Itisfreelife,authenticallyfreelife,governedandrecognizedbyall.Themostharmfultothepublicmind,writesMachiavelli,“istomakealawandnottoobeyit;andallthemoresowhenitisnotobservedbythepersonwhohasenactedit”.

“No praise is worthy of such a great man”

Sarcophagus of Niccolò Machiavelli in the Santa Croce Basilica, Firenze, Italy

But one of the most abused, misquoted, and vilipended section of NicolòMachiavelli’swritings(aboutthemurderofRemusbyRomulus,tofoundRome)is:


37

“manywillconsideritabadexamplethatafounderofarepublic,likeRomulus,killedhisbrother…Wemustagreethatthefactaccusesitwhentheeffectexcuses.”

Thisseemstomeanthattheendjustifiesthemeans.MachiavelliNEVERwrotethissentence;heCOULDNEVERhavewrittenit!Hisphilosophyofnecessityrestsontheprincipleofindecisionintimeandtheunpredictabilityofpoliticalaction.

WhatPatrickBoucheronprovidesneartheendofhisbookletisaseriesofshiningnuggets:hequotesMichelFoucaultwhoclaimedthatNiccolòMachiavelliwouldhaveseenthegrotesquecoginpower,liketheoneinourcurrentTrumpland,whererealityTVisthenewpoliticalphilosophy,andletsconcludesourcommonmentor,MauriceMerleau-Ponty:“todismisshopeanddespairfromthesamegesture.”

Disclosures:

* Myfather,BernardN.Halpern,didholdtheChairofExperimentalMedicineattheCollègedeFrance

** Heisalso-likemeandmanyothers,e.g.currentPresidentEmmanuelMacron-analumnusoftheLycéeHenriIV,thebestoneinFrance


38

Acknowledgements This essay follows the one on Michel Foucault and the Concept of Power; theycomplement and could justify each other. I could –should? - have started withXenophonwhoinfluenced(andpossiblyinspired)Machiavelli,butImightonedayembarkonrevisitingἀνάβασις(Anabasis)andΚύρουπαιδεία(Cyropaedia);bothdeserveattentionandinterest.

My sources are listed below; I plundered, often verbatim, theWikipedia and theStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophyentries.The deluge of disturbing, frightening news required a more serene inquisitiveanalysis. When Yves P. Huin agreed on this exploration, he also promised –anddelivered- his technical, moral, critical and editorial indefatigable support. Morefodder was supplied by Albert BW Wong, Andrew LT Sheng and others whorequestedanonymity.Theerrors,mistakesandmisinterpretationsremainmine.

I must thank our daughter Emmanuelle Halpern-Mazères who ordered PatrickBoucheron’sbook,andhersonNoëwhohand-carrieditfromBarcelona.


39

References • https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Cohen(forLesThéophiliens)

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aucassin_and_Nicolette

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ca%27_Foscari_University_of_Venice

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galleria_nazionale_di_Parma

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Verdi

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaetano_Pesce

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%C3%B2_Machiavelli

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prince

• https://aeon.co/essays/the-prince-of-the-people-machiavelli-was-no-machiavellian

• https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Fei

• http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/is-chinas-machiavelli-now-its-most-important-political-philosopher/

• http://dept.ku.edu/~ceas/lessons2//docs/China_Han_Fei_Tzu_vs_Machiavelli.pdf

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci

• https://www.amazon.fr/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_3_15?__mk_fr_FR=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=patrick+boucheron+un+%C3%A9t%C3%A9+avec+machiavel&sprefix=Patrick+Boucher%2Caps%2C299&crid=K54AG7YPYBEJ

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_rerum_natura

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Defeat

• http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fascism/2017/04/preparing_for_an_american_reichstag_fire_how_modern_authoritarians_consolidate.html


40

Illustration Credits • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Florence

• http://www.parmabeniartistici.beniculturali.it/galleria-nazionale-di-parma/galleria/madonna-dellumilta/

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Roncole

• http://politicalethics.org/2016/03/22/niccolo-machiavelli/

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prince

• http://www.pitturaomnia.com/pitturaomnia_000102.htm

• http://edizioni.sns.it/it/i-discorsi-di-nicolo-machiavelli-sopra-la-prima-deca-di-tito-livio.html

• http://www.xinfajia.cn/UserFiles/2008-6/23/2008623104916902.jpg

• https://www.pinterest.com/denis34/worthies/

• http://www.bestourism.com/items/di/6753?title=Basilica-Santa-Croce&b=234


41

The Unusual Sources of the Enlightment

David Hume, the Buddha, and a search for the Eastern roots of the WesternEnlightenment

David Hume - Photo by: Getty

This essay is adapted and edited from “How an 18th-Century Philosopher HelpedSolveMyMidlifeCrisis”byAlisonGopnik,publishedinTheAtlantic(seeref.)


42

In1734,inScotland,a23-year-oldwasfallingapart.Asateenager,he’dthoughthehadglimpsedanewwayofthinkingandliving,andeversince,he’dbeentryingtoworkitoutandconveyittoothersinagreatbook.Theeffortwasliterallydrivinghimmad.Hisheartracedandhisstomachchurned.Hecouldn’tconcentrate.Mostofall,hejustcouldn’tgethimselftowritehisbook.Hisdoctorsdiagnosedvapors,weakspirits,and“theDiseaseof theLearned.”Today,withdifferent terminologybutnomore insight, we would say he was suffering from anxiety and depression. Thedoctorstoldhimnottoreadsomuchandprescribedantihystericpills,horsebackriding,andclaret -theProzac,yoga,andmeditationof theirday.Theyoungman’snamewasDavidHume.Somehow,duringthenextthreeyears,hemanagednotonlytorecoverbutalso,remarkably,towritehisbook.Evenmoreremarkably,itturnedouttobeoneofthegreatestbooksinthehistoryofphilosophy:ATreatiseofHumanNature.

InhisTreatise,Humerejectedthetraditionalreligiousandphilosophicalaccountsofhumannature.Instead,hetookNewtonasamodelandannouncedanewscienceofthemind,basedonobservationandexperiment.Thatnewscienceledhimtoradicalnewconclusions.Hearguedthattherewasnosoul,nocoherentself,no“I.”“WhenIentermost intimately into what I call myself,” hewrote in theTreatise, “I alwaysstumbleonsomeparticularperceptionorother,ofheatorcold,lightorshade,loveorhatred,painorpleasure.Inevercancatchmyselfatanytimewithoutaperception,andnevercanobserveanythingbuttheperception.”

Humehadalwaysbeenoneofmyheroes.UntilHume,philosophershadsearchedformetaphysicalfoundationssupportingourordinaryexperience,anomnipotentGodoratranscendentrealityoutsideourminds.ButHumeunderminedallthat.Whenyoureally lookhardateverythingwe thinkweknow,heargued, the foundationscrumble.Descartesatleasthadsaidyoualwaysknowthatyouyourselfexist(“Ithink,thereforeIam”),butHumerejectedeventhatpremise.


43

Photo by: Wikimedia


44

Hume articulates a thoroughgoing, vertiginous, existential kind of doubt. In theTreatise, he reports that when he first confronted those doubts himself he wasterrified-“affrightedandconfounded.”Theymadehimfeellike“somestrangeuncouthmonster.”Nowonderheturnedtothedoctors.Buthere’sHume’sreallygreatidea:Ultimately,themetaphysicalfoundationsdon’tmatter.Experienceisenoughallbyitself.WhatdoyoulosewhenyougiveupGodor“reality”oreven“I”?Themoonisstilljustasbright;youcanstillpredictthatafallingglasswillbreak,andyoucanstillacttocatchit;youcanstillfeelcompassionforthesufferingofothers.Scienceandwork andmorality remain intact. Go back to your backgammon game after yourskepticalcrisis,Humewrote,anditwillbeexactlythesamegame.Infact,ifyouletyourselfthinkthisway,yourlifemightactuallygetbetter.Giveuptheprospectoflifeafterdeath,andyouwillfinallyreallyappreciatelifebeforeit.Giveupmetaphysics,and you can concentrate on physics. Give up the idea of your precious, unique,irreplaceableself,andyoumightactuallybemoresympathetictootherpeople.

HowdidHumecomeupwiththeseideas,soprofoundlyatoddswiththeWesternphilosophyandreligionofhisday?WhatturnedtheneuroticPresbyterianteenagerintothegreatfounderoftheEuropeanEnlightenment?InmyofficeinHongKong,asI read Buddhist philosophy, I began to notice something that others had noticedbeforeme.SomeoftheideasinBuddhistphilosophysoundedalotlikewhatIhadreadinHume’sTreatise.Butthiswascrazy.Surelyinthe1730s,fewpeopleinEuropeknewaboutBuddhistphilosophy.Still,asIread,Ikeptfindingparallels.TheBuddhadoubted the existence of an omnipotent, benevolent God. In his doctrine of“emptiness,” he suggested thatwe have no real evidence for the existence of theoutsideworld.Hesaidthatoursenseofself isan illusion, too.TheBuddhistsageNagasenaelaboratedonthisidea.Theself,hesaid,islikeachariot.Achariothasnotranscendentessence;it’sjustacollectionofwheelsandframeandhandle.Similarly,the self has no transcendent essence; it’s just a collection of perceptions andemotions.

“Inevercancatchmyselfatanytimewithoutaperception.”

That sure sounded likeBuddhist philosophy tome -except, of course, thatHumecouldn’thaveknownanythingaboutBuddhistphilosophy.Orcouldhehave?

AlisonGopnikdiscoveredthatatleastonepersoninEuropeinthe1730snotonlyknewaboutBuddhismbuthadstudiedBuddhistphilosophyforyears.Hisnamewas


45

IppolitoDesideri,andhehadbeenaJesuitmissionaryinTibet.In1728,justbeforeHumebegantheTreatise,Desiderifinishedhisbook,themostcompleteandaccurateEuropeanaccountofBuddhistphilosophytobewrittenuntilthe20thcentury.Thecatchwasthat itwasn’tpublished.NoCatholicmissionarycouldpublishanythingwithouttheapprovaloftheVatican-andofficialstherehaddeclaredthatDesideri’sbookcouldnotbeprinted.ThemanuscriptdisappearedintotheChurch’sarchives.SheconsultedErnestMossner’sclassicbiographyofHume.WhenHumewrotetheTreatise,hewaslivinginalittleFrenchtowncalledLaFlèche,160milessouthwestofParis.MossnersaidHumewenttoLaFlècheto“rusticate,”probablybecauseitwascheap.ButhealsomentionedthatLaFlèchewashometotheJesuitRoyalCollege.So,Hume livednearaFrench Jesuit collegewhenhewrote theTreatise.But itdidn’treallyconnecthimtoDesideri,ofcourse,whohadlivedinRomeandTibet.

WhenAlisonGopniksearchedthelibrarydatabasesatBerkeley,shefoundhundredsofbooksandthousandsofarticlesshecouldreadaboutDavidHume,butonlytwoabout Ippolito Desideri: one article and a drastically abridged 1932 Englishtranslationofhismanuscript.ThearticlehadappearedinIndica,anobscurejournalpublished in Bombay, in 1986. The author, an Italian named Luciano Petech,mentionedthathehadediteda1952collectionofmissionarydocuments,IMissionariItalianinelTibetenelNepal,andthatitincludedsomeDesiderimanuscripts.Andheprovidedan interestingnewdetail. “In January1727,”Petechwrote, “he left India,oncemoreonaFrenchship,andarrivedinParis.”DesiderihadcomebacktoRomethroughFrance—onemoreintriguingcoincidence.

It’s a remarkable story. In his 20s,Desideri conceivedhis own grandproject—toconverttheIndiestoCatholicism-andin1716hebecameoneofthefirstEuropeansto go to Lhasa, and the first to stay. He was passionate, emotional, and easilyexasperated. Hewas also curious, brave, and unbelievably tenacious. In an earlyletterwrittenonhiswaytoTibet,hesayshefeelsasifheisbeingtornapartontherack. “It pleases his divine majesty to drawmy whole heart away with sweet andamorousviolencetowheretheperditionofsoulsisgreat,”hewrote,“andatthesametimewith fastest bonds aremy feet bound and drawn elsewhere.”He kept up thatintensepitch ineverythinghedid.Desiderisailed fromRometo India in1712. In1714hebeganwalkingfromDelhiacrosstheHimalayastoLhasa-atrekthatlasted18months.Hesleptontheground,inthesnow,andstruggledwithsnowblindness


46

and frostbite. At one point, he made his way over a rushing river by clingingprecariouslytoabridgemadeoftwovineropes.TogetthroughtheLadakhdesert,hejoinedthecaravanofaTartarprincessandarguedabouttheologywithhereachnightinhertent.

When he finally arrived in Lhasa, the king and the lamas welcomed himenthusiastically,andtheirenthusiasmdidn’twanewhenheannouncedthathewasalamahimselfandintendedtoconvertthemalltoCatholicism.Inthatcase,thekingsuggested,itwouldbeagoodideaforhimtostudyBuddhism.IfhereallyunderstoodBuddhismandhecouldstillconvincetheTibetansthatCatholicismwasbetter,thenofcoursetheywouldconvert.Desideriacceptedthechallenge.HespentthenextfiveyearsintheBuddhistmonasteriestuckedawayinthemountainsaroundLhasa.Themonasterieswereamongthelargestacademicinstitutionsintheworldatthetime.Desideriembarkedontheir12-year-longcurriculumintheologyandphilosophy.HecomposedaseriesofChristian tracts inTibetanverse,whichhepresented to theking.TheywerebeautifullywrittenonthescrollsusedbythegreatTibetanlibraries,withelegantletteringandcarvedwoodencases.

But his projectwas rudely interrupted bywar. An army from a nearby kingdominvaded,laidwastetoLhasa,murderedtheking-andthenwasitselfdefeatedbyaChinesearmy.Desideriretreatedtoanevenmoreremotemonastery.HeworkedonhisChristiantractsandmasteredthebasictextsofBuddhism.HealsotranslatedtheworkofthegreatBuddhistphilosopherTsongkhapaintoItalian.Inhisbook,DesideridescribesTibetanBuddhismingreatandaccuratedetail,especiallyinonevolumetitled“OftheFalseandPeculiarReligionObservedinTibet.”Heexplainsemptiness,karma,reincarnation,andmeditation,andhetalksabouttheBuddhistdenialoftheself.It’shardtoimaginehowDesiderikeptanysenseatallofwhohewas.Hespentall his time reading, writing, and thinking about another religion, in anotherlanguage. (Thupten Jinpa, the current Dalai Lama’s translator, told Alison thatDesideri’sTibetanmanuscriptsareevenmoreperceptivethantheItalianones,andarewritteninparticularlybeautifulTibetan,too.)

Desideri overcame Himalayan blizzards, mountain torrents, and war. Butbureaucraticinfightinggothimintheend.Rivalmissionaries,theCapuchins,werestrugglingbitterlywiththeJesuitsoverevangelicalturf,andtheyclaimedTibetforthemselves.Michelangelo Tamburini, the head of the Jesuits, orderedDesideri to


47

returntoEuropeimmediately,untiltheterritorydisputewassettled.ThelettertooktwoyearstoreachTibet,butonceitarrived,in1721,Desiderihadnochoice.Hehadtoleave.

Michelangelo Tamburini - Photo by: Wikimedia

Hespentthenext11yearswritingandrewritinghisbookandappealingdesperatelytotheVaticantolethimreturntoTibet.Ithadclearlybecometheonlyplacewherehereallyfeltthathewashimself.In1732theauthoritiesfinallyruled-infavoroftheCapuchins.Hisbookwouldnotbepublishedandhecouldneverreturn.Hediedfourmonths later. Almost at the end of Desideri’s book, Alison Gopnik came across asentencethatbroughtherupshort.“IpassedthroughLaFlèche,”hewrote,“andonSeptember the fourtharrived in the city of LeMans.” LaFlèche?WhereHumehadlived?Couldtherebeaconnectionafterall?

TheEnglishDesideriwasabridged.CouldonefindoutmoreintheItalianbookofmissionarydocumentsthatPetechhaddescribedinhisarticle?Thesevenvolumes


48

ofthe1952IMissionariItalianinelTibetenelNepal,nevertranslatedorreprinted,weredeliveredtoAlisonGopnikfromtheUCBerkeleystoragefacility.“Onthe31st(August)aroundnoon,”Desideriwrote,“IarrivedatourRoyalCollegeatLaFlèche.ThereIreceivedtheparticularattentionoftherector,theprocurator,PèreToluandseveralotherofthereverendfathers.Onthe4thIleftLaFlèche.”SoDesiderinotonlyhadbeentoLaFlèchebuthadalsotalkedwiththeJesuitsattheRoyalCollegeatsomelength.PetechdescribedthehistoryofDesideri’smanuscriptindetail.HeexplainedthatDesiderihadactuallywrittenmultiplemanuscriptsabouthistravels.HewrotethefirstwhilehewassailingfromIndiatoFrance,andevidencesuggeststhathehadthismanuscriptwithhimashemadehiswayfromFrancetoRomein1727.WhenhegotbacktoRome,herevisedhistextconsiderably,andsixmonthslaterheproducedanewmanuscript.Inthisversion,Desideriwrites,“WhenIreturnedthroughFranceand Italy to Tuscany and Rome, I was strongly urged by many men of letters, bygentlemenandbyimportantpersonages,towritedowninproperorderallIhadtoldthematdifferenttimes.”Thereason?ThereligionofTibetwas“soentirelydifferentfromanyother,”hewrote,thatit“deservestobeknowninordertobecontested.”So,itwaspossiblethatDesiderihadsenttheRoyalCollegeatLaFlècheacopyofthisrevisedmanuscript;theJesuitsregularlycirculatedsuchunpublishedreportsamongthemselves.ButDesiderivisitedin1727.DavidHumearrivedatLaFlècheeightyearslater,in1735.CouldanyonetherehavetoldHumeaboutDesideri?

HumealwaysdescribedhistimeatLaFlèchewithgreatfondness.Intheoneletterofhisthatsurvivesfromhistimethere,hesaysheisengagedinconstantstudy.LaFlèche’s librarywas exceptional -readingbookswas a farbetterway to learn, henotes,thanlisteningtoprofessors.Asforreapingalltheadvantagesofbothtravelandstudy,hewrites,“thereisnoplacemoreproperthanLaFlèche…ThePeopleareextremely civil and sociable and besides the good company in the Town, there is acollegeofahundredJesuits.”AlaterlettershowsthatHumetalkedwithatleastoneofthoseJesuitsatsomelength.HerecallswalkinginthecloisteroftheRoyalCollege,hishead“fullofthetopicsofmyTreatise,”withaJesuit“ofsomepartsandlearning.”TheJesuitwasdescribingamiracle,andthisinspiredHumetocomeupwithoneofhis cleverest skeptical arguments. A real miracle, he said, is by definition highlyimprobable,whichmeans thatdeceptionordelusion isalwaysamore likely -andthereforebetter- explanation.The Jesuitunderstood this reasoning (hewas “verymuchgravelled,”Humewrote)butsaidthatitsimplycouldn’tberight,becauseifit


49

were,youwouldhavetorejectnotjustthemiracleinquestionbutalltheGospels.“Whichobservation,”Humetheskepticnoteddrily,“Ithoughtitpropertotreatasasufficientanswer.”WhowasthisJesuit“ofsomepartsandlearning?”CouldhehavebeenoneofthefatherswhohadmetDesiderieightyearsearlier?Andwhoeverhewas,whatelsedidheandHumetalkabout?

For a long time, the conventional wisdom was that the Jesuits were retrogradeenforcers of orthodoxy. But in the 17th century, the Jesuitswere actually on thecuttingedgeofintellectualandscientificlife.TheyweredevotedtoCatholictheology,ofcourse,andtheCatholicauthoritiesstrictlycontrolledwhichideaswerepermittedandwhichwereforbidden.ButtheJesuitfathersattheRoyalCollegeknewagreatdealaboutmathematicsandscienceandcontemporaryphilosophy-evenhereticalphilosophy.Humehadsaid thatDescartes,NicolasMalebranche,andPierreBayleinspired the Treatise. Descartes graduated from the Royal College, andMalebranche’smostdedicatedstudentshadtaughtthere,althoughthemost-ferventMalebranchisteswereeventuallydismissed.BooksbyDescartes,Malebranche,andBaylewereinthecollegelibrary-althoughtheywereontheIndex,theVatican’slistof forbidden books. (Hume’sTreatise would join them later.) La Flèchewas alsostartlinglyglobal.Inthe1700s,alumniandteachersfromtheRoyalCollegecouldbefoundinParaguay,Martinique,theDominicanRepublic,andCanada,andtheywereubiquitousinIndiaandChina.Infact,thesleepylittletowninFrancewasoneofthevery few places in Europe where there were scholars who knew about bothcontemporaryphilosophyandAsianreligion.

TwelveJesuitfathershadbeenatLaFlèchewhenDesiderivisitedandwerestilltherewhenHumearrived.So,HumehadlotsofopportunitiestolearnaboutDesideri.Onenamestoodout:P.CharlesFrançoisDolu,amissionaryintheIndies.The“Tolu”inPetech’s book was a transcription error. Dolu not only had been particularlyinterestedinDesideri;hewasalsothereforallofHume’sstay.AndhehadspenttimeintheEast.Couldhebethemissinglink?

Inthe1730snotonebuttwoEuropeanshadexperiencedBuddhismfirsthand,andbothofthemhadbeenattheRoyalCollege.Desideriwasthefirst,andthesecondwasDolu.Hehadbeenpartofanother fascinatingvoyage to theEast: theFrenchembassytoBuddhistSiam. Inthe1680s,KingNaraiofSiambecameinterested inChristianity,andevenmore interested inEuropeanscience,especiallyastronomy.


50

LouisXIVdispatchedtwoembassiestoSiam,in1685and1687,includingastrongcontingentof Jesuit scientists.Doluwaspartof the1687group.Oneof theotherambassadorswasanother extraordinary17th-century figure: the abbédeChoisy.Theabbéwasanopenandfamoustransvestitewhogavethe ladiesoftheFrenchcourtfashiontips.HewroteaverypopularandentertainingaccountofhistriptoSiam.Humehaditinhislibrary,alongwithdeChoisy’sscandalousautobiography,TheMemoirs of the Abbé de ChoisyWho Dressed as aWoman. The abbé’s sexualfluiditywasagoodexampleoftheadventurous,boundary-crossingspiritofthe17thcentury,whichoftenleavesthe21stlookingstaidbycomparison.

TheJesuitsinthe1687embassy,includingDolu,stayedinSiamforayearandspentagreatdealoftimewiththetalapoins-theEuropeanwordfortheSiameseBuddhistmonks.ThreeofthemevenlivedintheBuddhistmonasteryandfolloweditsrules.LikeDesideri’smission,theSiameseembassyendedinbloodshedandchaos.In1688the local courtiers and priests revolted against the liberal king and his arrogantforeign advisers. They assassinated King Narai, the new bridge between the twoculturescrumbled,andtheJesuitsfledfortheirlives.Severalofthemdied.DoluandafewothersescapedtoPondicherry,inIndia,wheretheysetupaJesuitchurch.

In1723,afterhisextraordinarilyeventfulandexoticcareer,DoluretiredtopeacefulLaFlèchefortherestofhislonglife.Hewas80whenHumearrived,thelastsurvivingmemberoftheembassies,andarelicofthegreatageofJesuitscience.ToProtestantEnglish writers, he was a typical Catholic zealot. On the other hand, CatholicCapuchinwriters, Desideri’s adversaries, attackedDolu and his fellow Jesuits fortheirsympathytowardHinduism.Dolujoinedtwootherprieststobreakdownthedoors of a Hindu temple and destroy lamps and torches. But with Jean-VenanceBouchet,theheadoftheIndianmission,healsodesignedCatholicceremoniesthatintegratedHindutraditions,andtheVaticandisapproved.Infact,Bouchetbecameanoted scholar of Hinduism and adopted Hindu dress, ascetic practices, and evenvegetarianism.

“Therewasneveramorepoliteandgenerousman,noronemore learnedaboutthenaturalworld,”reportedaperiodicalofthetime.TheJesuitsbroughtstate-of-the-art12-foot-longtelescopestoSiamandthentoPondicherry,andtheymadeimportantastronomicaldiscoveries.Doluhadasenseofhumor,too,andwrotesatiricalsquibsandplays.AnaristocraticintellectualnamedSaint-Fondswrotetoafriendthatasan


51

amusement,back inFrance,hehad invitedDolu to lunchwithRobertChalles, anintenselyanti-Jesuitwriter-indeed,anatheist-whohadalsotraveledinSiamandIndia. Saint-Fonds hoped, he said, to enjoy the furious storm of controversy thatwouldsurelyresult.Butinstead,“Ifoundmyselfinthemidstofthegentlestbreezes,”hewrote.“P.Dolu,thenameofthemissionary,underawildbeard,isaJesuitperomnescasus,thatistosay,politeandpolitic,andheunderstandswittyreparteebetterthanaman of the world.” Dolu was an evangelical Catholic, and Hume was a skepticalProtestant,but theyhada lot incommon-endlesscuriosity,a loveofscienceandconversation,and,mostofall,asenseofhumor.Doluwasintelligent,knowledgeable,gregarious,andwitty,andcertainly“ofsomepartsandlearning.”HewasjustthesortofmanHumewouldhaveliked.

HumehadsaidthatPierreBayle’sHistoricalandCriticalDictionarywasanimportantinfluenceontheTreatise-particularlytheentryonSpinoza.OneofthefootnotesintheSpinozaentrywasabout “orientalphilosophers”who, likeSpinoza,denied theexistenceofGodandarguedfor“emptiness.”Anditcross-referencedanotherentryaboutthemonksofSiam,asdescribedbytheJesuitambassadors.HumemusthavebeenreadingaboutBuddhism,andDolu’sjourney,intheverybuildingwhereDolulived.Humecould indeedhaveknownaboutBuddhistphilosophy. In fact,hehadwrittentheTreatiseinoneofthefewplacesinEuropewherethatknowledgewasavailable.DoluhimselfhadhadfirsthandexperienceofSiameseBuddhism,andhadtalkedatsomelengthwithDesideri,whoknewaboutTibetanBuddhism.It’sevenpossiblethattheJesuitsattheRoyalCollegehadacopyofDesideri’smanuscript.Ofcourse,it’simpossibletoknowforsurewhatHumelearnedattheRoyalCollege,orwhetheranyofitinfluencedtheTreatise.PhilosopherslikeDescartes,Malebranche,andBaylehadalreadyputHumeontheskepticalpath.ButsimplyhearingabouttheBuddhistargumentagainsttheselfcouldhavenudgedhimfurtherinthatdirection.Buddhistideasmighthavepercolatedinhismindandinfluencedhisthoughts,evenifhedidn’ttracktheirsource.Afterall,contemporaryphilosophershavebeenknowntoborrowideaswithoutrememberingexactlywheretheycamefrom.

HistorianshavebeguntothinkabouttheEnlightenmentinanewlyglobalway.Thosecreakywoodenshipscarriedideasacrosstheboundariesofcontinents,languages,and religions just as the Internetdoesnow (although theywerea lot slowerandperhaps evenmoreperilous). As part of this newglobal intellectual history, new


52

bibliographiesandbiographiesandtranslationsofDesiderihavestartedtoappear,andnewlinksbetweenEasternandWesternphilosophykeepemerging.It’seasytothinkoftheEnlightenmentastheexclusiveinventionofafewiconoclasticEuropeanphilosophers.Butinabroadersense,thespiritoftheEnlightenment,thespiritthatbothHume and the Buddha articulated, pervades the story I’ve been telling. Thedrive to convert and conquer the “false and peculiar” in the name of somemetaphysicalabsolutewascertainlythere,intheWestandintheEast.Itstillis.Butthecharactersinthisstorywereevenmorestronglydrivenbythesimpledesiretoknow,andthesimplethirstforexperience.Theywantedtoknowwhathadhappenedbeforeandwhatwouldhappennext,whatwasontheothershoreoftheocean,theothersideofthemountain,theotherfaceofthereligiousorphilosophical-orevensexual-divide.

ThisstorymayhelpexplainHume’sideas.Itunquestionablyexemplifiesthem.Allthecharactersstartedoutwithclear,andclashing,identities-thepassionateItalianmissionaryandtheurbaneFrenchpriest,theTibetankingandlamas,theSiamesekingandmonks,theskepticalyoungScotBothHumeandtheBuddhawouldhavenoddedsagelyatthatthought.AlthoughDoluandDesideriwenttoSiamandTibettobringthewisdomofEuropetotheBuddhists,theyalsobroughtbackthewisdomoftheBuddhiststoEurope.SiamandTibetchangedthemmorethantheychangedSiamandTibet.AndhistwoyearsatLaFlècheundoubtedlychangedDavidHume.

Reference

• https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-an-18th-century-philosopher-helped-solve-my-midlife-crisis

niccolò machiavelli and the birth of political philosophy · niccolo machiavelli -the birth of...

Documents