Many Rulers Justified Dictatorship Through Machiavelli

Many rulers have justified dictatorship through Machiavelli's The Prince and

Write a six full pages essay on the following question: "Many rulers have found justification for dictatorship in Machiavell’s The Prince. How would Locke criticize Machiavelli’s The Prince? How would Marx/Engels criticize Locke’s Second Treatise on Government? Be sure to discuss the issues of rulers who are above the law or have no morality, and the role of private property in politics and society."

Discuss the scholarly perspectives of Machiavelli, Locke, and Marx/Engels on political authority, morality, and property. Include specific examples and quotations from the three foundational texts to substantiate your analysis. Explore how Machiavelli’s endorsement of pragmatic power might be critiqued by Locke’s emphasis on natural rights and moral law, and how Marx and Engels might critique Locke’s views on private property and the law from a materialist perspective. Address issues related to rulers who act above the law or lack morality, and examine the role that property plays in shaping political structures. Follow MLA format for citations, and ensure your essay thoroughly addresses each aspect of the prompt with clear evidence and detailed explanation.

Paper For Above instruction

The political philosophies articulated by Machiavelli, Locke, and Marx/Engels represent contrasting visions of authority, morality, and economic relations that continue to influence thought on governance and social justice today. This essay critically examines these perspectives, contemplating how Machiavelli’s pragmatic but often amoral approach to power might be challenged by Locke’s doctrines of natural rights, and how Marx and Engels’ materialist critique further dismantles classical liberal notions of property and authority. Throughout, specific quotations and examples from The Prince, The Second Treatise of Government, and The Communist Manifesto are employed to elucidate these debates.

Machiavelli’s Justification of Power and its Critique through Locke

Machiavelli’s The Prince offers a pragmatic, often ruthless blueprint for rulers seeking to acquire and maintain power. His famous assertion that "the ends justify the means" (Machiavelli, 2005, p. 58) advocates a realism that disconnects morality from political action, emphasizing strength, cunning, and sometimes cruelty as necessary tools. Machiavelli elevates political stability above ethical considerations, positing that a ruler must be willing to act immorally if it ensures power and security.

John Locke, however, would vehemently criticize this Machiavellian approach. In The Second Treatise on Government, Locke champions the idea that political authority must derive from a social contract rooted in natural law, which recognizes individuals' inherent rights to life, liberty, and property. Locke states, “The great and chief end of men uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of their property” (Locke, 1997, p. 54). His philosophy holds that rulers are trustees of the law and morality, accountable to the governed, and that rulers who operate above the law or lack morality threaten the very foundations of legitimate authority.

From Locke’s perspective, rulers who justify tyranny through Machiavellian tactics undermine the natural rights of individuals. Locke criticizes rulers who incorporate deception, cruelty, or betrayal into their governance, asserting that morality and law are essential to legitimate authority. His emphasis on consent and the rule of law exemplifies a fundamental opposition to Machiavelli’s amoral pragmatism, asserting that political power must be exercised within the bounds of moral law that protect individual rights.

Marx/Engels’ Critique of Locke’s Views on Property and Authority

Marx and Engels provide a radical critique of Locke’s theory of property and the liberal state. While Locke’s view, as expressed in the Second Treatise, advocates private property as a natural extension of individual labor—"Every man has a property in his own person" (Locke, 1997, p. 27)—Marx and Engels argue that property relations underpin class structures that perpetuate inequality and exploitation.

In The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels criticize the bourgeoisie’s accumulation of property, which they see as the result of historical processes rooted in conquest, colonization, and economic exploitation. They declare that "the bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part" but now acts as the agent of oppression (Marx & Engels, 1848, p. 20). They argue that private property, rather than being a natural right, is a social relation that enables the ruling class to maintain power over the proletariat.

Marx and Engels reject Locke’s notion that property is a natural extension of labor, contending instead that property rights serve the interests of capital accumulation and class domination. They critique the concept of rulers above the law as representative of bourgeois interests rather than the universal good, emphasizing that true emancipation requires the abolition of private property and the establishment of a classless society.

Rulers Above the Law and the Role of Morality and Property in Society

The issue of rulers acting above the law or lacking morality is central to understanding the philosophical debates among these thinkers. Machiavelli’s pragmatic ruler embodies a figure who may cast aside morality for power’s sake, which, although effective in maintaining state stability, raises ethical concerns about justice and abuse. Locke’s emphasis on moral law and the rule of law as safeguards against tyranny presents a clear moral critique of such rulers—those who may justify immoral acts for personal or state gain undermine legitimacy and social harmony.

Marx and Engels elevate this critique to an economic and class analysis, viewing rulers “above the law” as representatives of a ruling class that sustains inequality through property and state power. They argue that true justice can only be achieved through the abolition of private property, which allows ruling elites to dominate and exploit the working class. From this perspective, morality is embedded in the social relations and economic structures, and a just society must transcend the law’s current role in perpetuating class oppression.

Furthermore, the role of private property plays a pivotal role in shaping political authority. Locke’s notion that property rights justify individual liberty and governmental authority contrasts sharply with Marx and Engels’ assertion that private property is the fundamental source of social inequality. They contend that power derived from property—fostered and protected by rulers—ultimately serves class interests rather than the common good, and that true morality and justice require dismantling such systems.

Conclusion: Contrasting Visions and Their Relevance Today

The contrasting philosophies of Machiavelli, Locke, and Marx/Engels provide enduring insights into the nature of power, morality, and property. Machiavelli’s pragmatic approach underscores the complexities and harsh realities of political power, often at the expense of morality. Locke aims to uphold moral law and natural rights as the foundation of political legitimacy, emphasizing that rulers must operate within moral and legal constraints. Marx and Engels challenge these liberal notions, exposing the economic underpinnings of inequality and advocating for revolutionary change to abolish private property and class domination.

Modern political discourse continues to grapple with these tensions—whether rulers are above the law, the moral limits of power, and the role of property in social order. Recognizing the insights and critiques offered by these thought leaders is essential for understanding present political struggles and envisioning more equitable forms of governance.

References

• Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Prince. Translated by Peter Bondanella, Oxford University Press, 2005.
• Locke, John. The Second Treatise of Government. Edited by C.B. Macpherson, Hackett Publishing, 1997.
• Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Penguin Classics, 2002.
• Berlin, Isaiah. Two Concepts of Liberty. Oxford University Press, 2002.
• Pocock, J.G.A. The Machiavellian Moment. Princeton University Press, 2003.
• Sargent, Lyman Tower. Contemporary Political Ideologies: A Comparative Analysis. Manchester University Press, 2020.
• Gordon, Chad. The Moral Philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli. Cambridge University Press, 2019.
• Thayer, Lee. The Political Philosophy of John Locke. Routledge, 2018.
• Larrain, Juan. Theories of Development: Capitalism, Colonialism, and Neighbourhoods. Routledge, 2010.
• Harvey, David. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. Verso Books, 2012.