Machiavellianism: Evil, or Tough Love?

One of my personal favorite political philosophers, and one who until recently had effectively been exiled from the field of political theory because he was perceived to be the embodiment of evil and a man who encouraged atrocities, is Niccolo Machiavelli. Machiavelli lived in Renaissance Florence, serving essentially as a Secretary of State for the Florentine Republic and basically the Chief of Staff for the ruler of the city until the prior rulers, the Medici, returned to reclaim their power and exiled Machiavelli for serving the Republic. Machiavelli lived the remainder of his life on a small farm in Florentine territory, where he developed and compiled his theories based on his own experiences with Renaissance Italian politics (which were essentially Game of Thrones without the dragons). In his book The Prince, Machiavelli provides advice to a fictional ruler about how to maintain state power and stability. 

Thus, the political school of realism developed, a school which was built on the principle of "the ends justifying the means" even if those means involve murder, oppression, manipulation, and other hobbies of sociopaths. Machiavelli also focused heavily on the manipulation of public opinion, and argued that a ruler must be feared and respected by his subjects in order to make any progress. The main tenet of this philosophy stated that a ruler should not do anything unless it provided some benefit to the state. 

So yes, on the surface, it isn't that difficult to see why people viewed this philosophy as evil, since it did say it was okay to kill, torture, and enslave people. Yet what many fail to realize is that Machiavelli and other realists aren't advocating evil; they advocate pragmatism, and the advancement of state interests above individual ideology or global interests. They recognized the need to abandon failing policies in favor of something else; examining realist politicians reveals this to be true. Otto von Bismark, a prime example of a more modern realist, unified Germany after manipulating the French in to starting a war and invading German territory. Yet he also recognized the need to provide basic civil liberties, civil rights, and similar protections to all citizens to encourage loyalty to the state and prevent disorder, chaos, and anarchy (another French Revolution). Machiavelli's beliefs can be understood better when looked at alongside the political landscape of Italy at that time; constant warfare, discontent amongst the lower classes, and frequent power struggles between political rivals (which were more often than not deadly). Given this environment, it makes sense why he would support methods that would increase stability in the region; nobody benefits from instability.

So why do I like Machiavelli and realism? It stems from my appreciation of their resolve to advance society's long-term interests at the expense of short-term gains that can result in instability: it is better to conserve your ice cream so you have some for tomorrow than make a  huge sundae today, have no ice cream for tomorrow and be executed by your friends when they realize they have no ice cream. (Best analogy ever: ice cream explains realist politics!) My admiration for realism also comes from its advocation of pragmatism. Personally, I believe modern society has become blinded by ideals, resulting in an inability to compromise, and thus an inability to resolve the problems that will inevitably arise from circumscribing to one set of ideals (no matter what it is, extremism and refusing to compromise are not good). While I recognize that many of the means Machiavelli advocated are, thankfully, no  longer necessary to preserve order, I still respect his end goal; a peaceful, stable society where all are able to live prosperous, comfortable, and free lives. (Yes, he did actually believe in republican government, though only when he felt society was educated enough to effectively maintain it [where have we hear that before?(Jefferson)]).