Thursday, November 29, 2012

Thoreau vs. Machiavelli: Morality vs. Stability


When comparing Civil Disobedience by Thoreau to Machiavelli’s The Prince, there is no correct answer as to which is more rational.  Both of them share their outlook on the government; however, they both have their differences in their opinions.  For starters, Thoreau is talking to the bystanders telling them to act against the government he calls “the machine.”  While Machiavelli is talking to the princes, advising them on how they should run their own governments.  So we can already see that they are opposites just from labeling their audiences.  Furthermore, due to Thoreau’s use of language and unrealistic style of living life, Machiavelli’s style of government will be better because of the fact that it is realistic and truthful.

Something important to notice is that both Machiavelli and Thoreau focus greatly on the relationship between people and their leaders. Machiavelli focuses on how a leader should act towards his subjects, and Thoreau writes about how an individual should react to a corrupt leader.  These concepts are in great contrast to each other; Machiavelli believes that a ruler may do whatever is necessary to remain in power, whereas Thoreau would not hesitate to spend a night in jail if he disagreed with a tax.  However, it is important to realize that not everyone is as brave as Thoreau, so this might be unrealistic.  Machiavelli writes, “Thus no prince should mind being called cruel for what he does to keep his subjects united and loyal.” This quote reflects his very elitist views; as long as it is for the good of the country, the outcome justifies the cruelty.  Sometimes cruelty needs to be practiced in order to maintain stability.
 
Thoreau believes that men and women should act upon their morals and principles… to “let your life be a friction to stop the machine," –- the machine being a metaphor for a corrupt government.   While this is a great theory, I think that it is slightly unrealistic.  No one wants to be the one to stand up against a machine. The idea of fighting for what you believe in looks great on paper… but, unfortunately, the truth is that when the opportunity is given to do so, most of us will back down out of fear.  Machiavelli talks about the power of fear; he says “fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.”  His theory is essentially that, by establishing the fear of punishment, a prince is able to maintain an orderly government without injustice. That being said, his presumption is more realistic than Thoreau’s because fear can control people.  An example of this is when Ms. Parham used a Machiavellian-style of teaching the other day, and not one person stood up against “the machine.”  ( :D )  That is because our fear of punishment controlled us, which is the same way men and women would act under a Machiavellian-style government; orderly.  

No comments:

Post a Comment