Blog 3 (Garry)

Towards the end of Machiavelli’s The Prince, in chapter twenty-five, Machiavelli writes about “How much fortune can achieve in human affairs, and how it is to be resisted” (74). He uses this chapter to explain that there are two factors that contribute to a ruler’s success: fortune and a ruler’s control, but suggests that “fortune favors the bold.” This means that those (rulers) who are brave and take initiatives will often end up with a better outcome than those who does not have control and rely completely on fortune. Using a metaphor, Machiavelli compares his theory of fortune with “torrential rivers”. He states that “She [fortune] demonstrates her power where precautions have not been taken to resist her; she directs her attacks where she knows banks and barriers have not been built to hold her” (75). A ruler who does not take a stand will end up with negative outcomes because he will not be prepared when he has to take on a challenge. However, if the ruler is bold then he will have his guard up at all times.

While Machiavelli’s advice of being bold in favor of fortune to become a successful ruler is good, I feel that it can be a bit flawed too. It is true that in political life and struggle, those who are bold and not afraid to take initiatives ends with better outcomes. Machiavelli’s advice, however, does not apply to everyone and is not always the same in different situations. Similar to the theories Machiavelli presents throughout The Prince, the one in this chapter is what I call the “if, then, and but” theory. If the ruler is faced with a certain situation, then he will end up with a certain outcome, but it depends on the situation. This can be seen in the second paragraph of chapter twenty-five when he is comparing the two types of rulers. He states that, “...of the two cautious men, one will succeed, and the other not; and similarly we see that two men can be equally successful though quite different in their behavior, one of them being cautious and the other headstrong” (75). Thus, it goes back to the notion that the outcome depends on the situation and not only on the ruler.