Machiavelli Liberality in Relation to Online Article by Smith Essay Example

Introduction

Smith is a professor of politics at Concordia University and in his article, he felt there are lessons that can be learned from the philosophies of Machiavelli. The article titled liberality, he addresses conservatives and the lessons they can learn from Machiavelli. He argues that the modern state can emulate Machiavelli's teaching of generosity. Machiavelli was an Italian political philosopher born in 1469. He was a critical thinker and most of his works are applicable even in today's political moves and decisions by political actors. His work and theories in politics and governance elicit both support and criticism in equal measure in the modern world of politics and governance. Many viewed him as immoral and an atheist because of his political philosophies and arguments in public gatherings and lectures. There are many lessons that can be learned from the Machiavellian liberality and can help advance today's political decisions and shape the people's opinion on political matters for both right and left-leaning politicians. Smith wrote his article in May 2012 and talked about generosity and how political players can learn from the past. This paper looks at how the modern state embodies Machiavelli's teaching on generosity and what lessons can be learned. It also looks at how Machiavellian generosity differs from Aristotle's understanding of liberality.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Modern state

Modern states like Canada embody Machiavellian teaching on generosity.Machiavelli gave an example of a prince who when giving to the less privileged in the society, should ensure that he does not give from his own pocket. He argued that if the prince does that, then he might become poor as a result of being generous. Machiavelli according to Smith argued that those who are too generous impoverish themselves. The modern state embodies this because politicians more so legislatures understand that generosity can create a positive image for the political actors and so it is good to be seen to be generous. Machiavelli recommended that political actors should find ways in which they would be generous but without spending their personal money. That way the political actor will be popular and appear good to the people by being too generous which would come without costing him the personal wealth. Modern state embodies Machiavellian teaching on generosity in several ways. The political actors in modern state use taxes to help people and present it in a way that appears like it is out of their own generosity. Needy people do not have the time to think about how the taxes they pay are used. This way the legislatures use taxes to be generous to people without incurring personal cost.

According to Enright et al 2008, politicians pledge to help the poor and in the process make the liberals and non-liberals feel it is the work of the government to help those in need because they do pay taxes to the government and the government, on the other hand, should always address peoples need without demanding them to be generous. Modern day liberals according to Smith feel that it is not their responsibility.According to modern-day liberals, being generous is not an option since they believe the government should use the money it collects from the people to better their lives. The citizens themselves in the modern state feel happy that the political actors help resolve their needs and term them as generous but the truth of the matter is the politician has done what he is supposed to do with the taxes but did not necessarily use his or her money. In the modern state, every individual tends to expect the government to provide for those in need since they pay taxes and all their problems will be sorted. Smith argued that it is not good to always expect the state to help and provide solutions. People should use their resources to help the less privileged and feel responsible to do so.

Lessons from the Machiavellian liberality

Smith in his article observes that the Machiavellian principle of liberality is applied today. People have learned lessons from the Machiavellian principle of generosity. He believes that the teaching on generosity can help to build on Canada's future as a democratic country that has different political sides. Conservatives according to him are students of history and should keep learning from history what can be learned in today's politics so as to adapt to situations. According to Smith, generosity is one of the distinguished Machiavellian liberalities that can help guide in modern-day redistributive policies. He wondered why people would assume that individuals are responsible for themselves or the government is responsible for all. It is not good for conservatives in Canada to believe so. People should learn that generosity is good when practiced and the lesson that should be learned is that is not bad to take some form of collective responsibility for others as opposed to always being individualistic. This was based on the survey questions and Smith argued that it is important for Conservatives to learn to avoid radical individualism.

Smith argues that modern people on the people on the left side of the spectrum should learn to be sufficiently Machiavellian and not insufficiently so. Machiavelli was of the view that people should not observe as resources are wasted. It is their responsibility to ensure that austerity measures are put in place so as to reduce wastage. It is the responsibility of modern-day left-leaning politicians to ensure that resources are used for the right reasons.

Those on the left side of the political spectrum should ensure that the government institutions mandated to help people in the country should do their job right. Those who are students of the Machiavellian principle should learn that Machiavelli anticipated a situation where even if the individuals were not generous, the state should ensure that people's needs are addressed but not a situation where the government does not meet its obligation in helping. The people on the left side of the spectrum should learn that even if they don't use their resources to extend generosity, they should ensure that the institutions are able to help those who need help. It is important to learn that even though one is generous, you have a limit as an individual. You cannot provide solutions by being generous all the time using your own resources. Sometimes it is good to use state resources contributed through taxes to extend your generosity. This can only be properly achieved through the use of policy and providing policy guided solution for all as a social service to the citizen.

Machiavellian generosity differs from Aristotle's liberality

Aristotle and Machiavelli had very different philosophical thinking and this explains why they had different views on liberality. Machiavelli was brought up in Italy in the renaissance era while Aristotle was brought up in Greece in the classical era. They were influenced by different philosophies of life.

According to Smith, Aristotle would not fight on generosity just based on its pleasures and usefulness as Machiavelli would. Virtues are more important than the act itself. A virtuous person will easily be generous at their own volition as opposed to being forced by forces of nature to do so. Some people will simply be generous because they want to attain a particular agenda as opposed to doing it because it is in them to be good. For example, according to Machiavellian generosity, a politician who wants to become a prince will use people's resources to appear to be generous, unlike Aristotle whose form of liberality is based on virtues. Machiavelli believed that the prince should not use his resources as a show of generosity and instead they should use other people's resources to avoid situations where they would become poor by being generous. Aristotle held the position that this would make people stingy. People have it within them to always assume that it is not their responsibility to help other people. However, they should be encouraged to be responsible for others and extend the act of generosity whenever they feel they can. Aristotle thinks that when people decide to engage in wishful thinking, t may not be of any help to them. They should work hard to ensure that they help themselves and others around them to have a better life as opposed to them waiting for the government to do it through policy. Aristotle's liberality comes from the point that people should be their brother's keeper and should pursue goals for the benefit of themselves and others. Machiavelli's generosity differs from that. According to Machiavelli's generosity, giving too much and being very generous can make one poor in the process which he discourages.

Conclusion

It is important to be generous. It brings out the good personality in people. Throughout history, people have never been equal economically. There are those with resources and those with less resource to the extent that they are unable to support their own basic needs. Aristotle observed that it is good when people are generous and not always wait for the government to help those in need. Machiavellian view based on the prince story was different. To those in leadership were advised not to use their own resources to extend generosity as that would make them poor. In as much as it is the responsibility of the state to take care of the needs of the people, it is naturally expected for generous people to give back to the community. Smith in his article addressed to the conservatives addressed this well when addressing the topic of generosity. He compared both Machiavellian generosity and Aristotle's liberty. It is always good to be generous whenever you can in the community around you. It is good to separate the Machiavelli liberality and the virtue of generosity.Generosity is an act of kindness and it helps promote humanity in the court and the world. Every person should learn to be generous in one or the other since we are not all empowered economically and socially. Some need help and it is upon the government and the generous people in society to help.

Bibliography

Enright, William G., and Richard T. Miyamoto. "Building a cathedral for your soul: generosity as a virtue and a practice." Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 138, no. 5 (2008): 552-556.

Travis D. Smith "Liberality: Little Caesars and Value Statement 12" (2012) 1

Shell, Susan Meld. "Rousseau, Optimism, and Critique-Steven B. Smith: Modernity and Its Discontents: Making and Unmaking the Bourgeois from Machiavelli to Bellow (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2016. Pp. 416.)." The Review of Politics 79, no. 4 (2017): 685-688.