The thesis of this essay is that Machiavelli's understanding of the nature of politics includes both the ideological and tangible effects necessary for a state to endure. This essay will attempt to discuss both, including Machiavelli's thoughts on war, the prince's methods of behavior, and how he must take on the traits of beasts. Next his ideas of rationality, luck and virtue and thoughts on ordinary people are discussed. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay What is Machiavelli's understanding of the nature of politics in The Prince? Much of The Prince focuses on the importance of statehood, warfare, and how to fortify and acquire new states. Machiavelli implies the methods of acquiring new principalities and how to maintain them. He states in chapter XII of The Prince that the foundations of all states are good laws and good weapons, indicating the importance that the army and the use of force have in strengthening the state. Althusser (1999: 83) insists that the “tools” of force, consensus and conflicting moods (the army, religion and laws respectively) are part of the state and help to maintain it. Applying each of these aspects accurately whenever necessary to meet the needs of the state is what shapes popular politics. Subsequently, the military is seen as a state apparatus: essentially, the primary attribute of state power is that of armed force. The supremacy of weapons over ideology is epitomized when Machiavelli insists that while an unarmed prophet will fail, an armed prophet is more likely to succeed. From this it can be deduced that, although a prince's ideology and methods of behavior are clearly relevant to Machiavelli, the conduct of war and the possession of a strong military base are even more significant. In his vision of politics, the training and action of the army are essential and can be considered a tool to ensure the maintenance of the state. Thus, ideology and the military act as components of politics rather than as autonomous institutions. Machiavelli instills great importance in how the prince should act and insists that the prince must have a duality of appearance, behaving as such as to elicit the public's goodwill. As Gilbert (1984: 170) argues, Machiavelli attempted to formulate “rules of behavior” deduced from his own experiences. These rules, often in the form of deception, help the prince win the public's admiration. Such deception is part of what Althusser (1999: 99) calls the ideological politics of the prince, and allows the prince to manipulate ordinary people by means justified by the end, that is, the control of their thoughts. This is not "ideological demagogy", he states, and is limited to politics alone, constituted by the conduct and practice of the prince. Machiavelli states that fraud should be “well hidden: one should be a great impostor and dissembler.” This refers to the duality of appearance and how it is achieved: Machiavelli theorizes that the prince will occasionally be forced to do evil, and if so, the prince should still disguise his immoral conduct as moral conduct (Althusser, 1999 :99.) Furthermore, Machiavelli believes that it is "much safer to be feared than loved" and insists only that if the prince cannot do both because it is "certainly difficult", he must at all costs avoid being hated by the people common. Furthermore, although virtues are encouraged, they must not trap the prince, Althusser emphasizes, as necessity mightrequest the prince to renounce these acts. Machiavelli's basic assertion is that the Prince must do everything necessary to protect the State and ensure its stability. Political morality and morality are therefore two very different things: the prince must be ready to commit immoral acts if this facilitates the stability of his rule. Hatred of the people must be avoided at all costs as it implies a class meaning, as noted by Althusser, (1999: 101) who describes the ideological Prince as better suited to supporting the people rather than the nobles. Thus, much of Machiavelli's political thought consists of the prince's ideology and actions rather than intentions (which, if not always virtuous, must always support the state). It is emphasized that morality is irrelevant in the very separate notions of political morality and must be kept aside so that the idea of ​​the Prince and his actions can arouse the public's goodwill. Machiavelli's political thought includes the analogies between the Prince and animals and the characteristics that they must share. He states that one must be “a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to scare away wolves.” Althusser (1999: 95) explains this double personality: one must become master of both fraud and force. The lion is very ferocious while the fox is very cunning. If a prince possesses these qualities, he can ensure that he is a master of deception who is constantly one step ahead of others and at the same time one who wields fear. Furthermore, Machiavelli relates the prince and the centaur. The centaur is man and beast and therefore employs the characteristics of both, allowing the Prince to exercise moral virtues predominantly seen as human and at the same time to do what is necessary, be it sneaky or "evil", characteristic of the animal. . Machiavelli's argument allows us to separate the character of the Prince into two halves, which we can see as advocating both moral and immoral behavior. He insists that it is important to use both to the state's advantage, as virtues will elicit popular support and obligatory deception naturally follows a level of cunning that a prince must possess. His use of animals in characterizing the acts a prince must perform suggests that human nature can be an obstacle when he is in a position of power and cannot survive on his own. The above-mentioned aspects of Machiavelli's thinking connect to his ideas of rationality and the greater good. As the prince's dual personality suggests, he is often forced to commit acts of violence that cannot in any way be considered morally virtuous but can instead be considered politically moral. Althusser (1999: 92) argues that the Prince belongs to a “different realm of existence” and is therefore not subject to typical ideas of vice and virtue. For him he must do everything necessary to ensure the consolidation of the state and is judged solely by his success. The Prince is now morally virtuous "through political virtue". Machiavelli's ideas of cruelty and rationality propagate a type of impartial violence, used simply to achieve the end, namely a strengthened state. Once notions of morality are removed, violence is observed to be impersonal and orchestrated, making it an act of practicality. Gilbert (1984: 176) further explains this idea of ​​rationality by stating that Machiavelli follows the line of thought in believing that politics is a “demanding mistress” towards which all of man's behavior and action must be oriented. The commands of politics therefore reign supreme and man should be entirely 'homo politicus'. In essence, this requires man to respond andobey the commands of politics, even if they are full of deception and devious behavior that cannot be morally justified. Machiavelli must therefore be considered a supporter of a “rational psychology”, adds Gilbert, (1984: 190) – in the sense that he believes that the acts of a prince can be rationalized if the positive effect they will have on the state is considered. Machiavelli redefines the ethics of politics and government by justifying occasional violence, since in his opinion this is entirely impersonal and serves a larger purpose. However, it should be noted that he is in no way in favor of violence over peace and morally right actions, even though he deems it necessary at times. Although he continually claims that amoral action might often be the most effective when addressing various political issues, Gilbert (1984: 196) reminds us that he in no way showed a “preference for amoral action” and was not a conscious advocate of bad . It is established that it was not Machiavelli's intention to upset moral values, but, as mentioned above, simply irrelevant in the context of active politics. Machiavelli also uses the ideas of "fortune" and "virtu" when analyzing a prince's rise to power and his retention. Gilbert (1984: 179) defines Machiavelli's use of the word virtue as the “fundamental quality of man” that enables him to accomplish great feats and works. Virtue is described as an innate quality devoid of external circumstances and is necessary for leadership, and is a single-minded will that leads to victory for those who possess it. Machiavelli insists that it is a prerequisite for a successful state and is not limited exclusively to the prince: for example, it is possible that the army also has virtue. According to him, governments cannot function without it. Virtue is followed by luck: these are the external circumstances from which virtue is exempt and are essentially good luck. In relation to virtue, Machiavelli insists that, although luck can be regarded as governing half of an individual's actions, it is entirely possible for human beings to oppose it and act as a counterweight. Gilbert (1985: 194) describes virtue and luck as two completely different forces that clash against each other and are in constant competition to determine one's situation. Since countering luck is an opportunity offered only fleetingly, man must take charge of an "encounter between circumstance and individuality". Althusser clarifies the encounter between virtue and luck in three phases: correspondence, non-correspondence and deferred correspondence. Correspondingly, luck and virtue meet to form a “lasting principality.” In non-matching, luck alone determines one's fate and is considered highly undesirable as the individual in question is not adequately endowed with virtue. Deferred correspondence refers to a situation in which the individual is favored by luck and is able to deal with it with his virtue. Therefore, Machiavelli's political theory delves into both the microcosm and the macrocosm and how they play a role in determining the Prince. It makes him crucial to the state: as a leading figure, the prince's skill and fortune have a direct impact on the stability of his government and the state he leads. The natural environment and free will, although competing forces, can be addressed with foresight. This is similar to the ideas of determinism versus action: in this situation, Machiavelli believes that human control can only go so far and is not a concrete force. Although much emphasis is placed on the Prince and his methods of behavior, Machiavelli similarly examines beliefs.