Machiavelli even suggests that the people can differentiate and prioritize between appearances and outcomes – if, in fact, the two are fundamentally distinct: after all, outcomes themselves have appearances and all appearances are certainly not false. (lk 22)
Machiavellit/Machiavellist lugedes saadab alati selline äratabamise moment, et see on keskne teema, miks makjavellism on väga negatiivse alatooniga sõna. See eristus välimuse ja tulemuse vahel on üks neist paljudest teemadest.
Cynically inclined readers should also note how Machiavelli affiliates himself directly with the people throughout The Prince. […] Machiavelli wrote to the Gonfalonier’s [Piero Soderini] nephew, with words that presage The Prince by seven years, “I am looking not through your glass [i.e., that of a young patrician], in which nothing is seen but prudence, but rather through the glass of the many, who have to judge the end of things as they are done and not the means by which they are done.” (lk 22)
Ja samal leheküljel järgmine tüüpjuhtum: eesmärgid ja vahendid. Kas viimane õigustab esimest või õigustab esimene viimast? - saa teada tänasest reality tv show osast: debiilikud andmas hinnanguid asjadele, millest nad midagi ei jaga.
Machiavelli describes the people’s appetites in finite terms, while he presents the grandi’s appetite as unquenchable: the people wish “only” not to be oppressed by the few, an outcome that can be achieved concretely, whereas the grandi’s appetite to dominate is insatiable – there is no point at which they definitively achieve this end. (lk 24)
Kui see niimoodi sõnadesse panna, siis on see ilmselt üks vastuoluline seisukoht.
In Florentine parlance, the term “alteration” (alterazione) connotes both a change of plans and a political coup. (lk 25)
Kujutle kui võimuvõtmised on nii harilikud, et suvalistele sõnadele hakkab tekkima võimuvastaseid konnotatsioone. Keelepolitsei halvim unenägu.
In at least two other places, one each in The Prince and the Discourses, he recounts with apparent approval how a group of elites is explicitly hacked to pieces (P I3) or implies that they should have been (D I.27). (lk 26)
Loogika jätkub siin, et kui keegi on liiga suur, siis tuleb ta otseses mõttes väiksemateks tükkideks teha. Sama „too big to fail“ probleem rakendatud inimestele ja elegantselt lahendatud.
Machiavelli associates the maturation of the Roman Republic with the establishment of its three principal parts: a tamed princely power in the consuls, a somewhat chastened aristocratic power in the senate, and an insurgent popular power indirectly reflected by the tribunes of the plebs and directly embodied in the citizen assemblies where votes were weighted in favor of wealthier citizens. (lk 31)
Okei.
A large subset of contemporary democratic theory would have one believe that the central issue at stake in democratic founding hinges on a logical-normative question of origins: how can the authority (or force) necessary to found a democracy be justified before such action was ever legitimated democratically? Fortunately, historical and empirical studies of democratic transitions suggest that this “democratic paradox” bewitching so many theorists of democracy – so much so that it has them and their conceptualized regimes figuratively chasing their tails – is largely beside the point. Democracies and governi larghi, from ancient Athens and Rome to contemporary Poland and Chile, emerge out of authoritarian regimes, whether autocratic or oligarchic. The organizational and institutional choices available to democratizing forces in such regimes are always constrained by the kinds of structures within which (and against which) they operate. (lk 35)
Huvitav kõrvalehüppe tänapäeva demokraatlikku teooriasse.
In these opening chapters of the Discourses, Machiavelli sets the parameters of a political bargain, the terms of which he hopes to maneuver his dedicatees into accepting: the grandi constrain their appetite for complete domination of the people at home, granting the latter institutions such as the tribunate and popular assemblies and practices such as public accusations, so that people may sere as the regime’s “guard of liberty.” (lk 37)
Varsti hakkan seda raamatut lugema. Jah, ma tean, mul on endal ka piinlik.
Ruccelai founded the reading group named after his family gardens, the Orti Oricellari, ostensibly as a forum for humanist literati with a particular interest in the neo-platonism of Marsilio Ficino. But like other platonically inclined "academies," the Orti also served as a haven where young aristocrats aired their grievances against the purported ignorance of the popolo and the supposed opressivness of the popular regime under which they lived. Many of the young grandi who would participate in the overthrow of the governo largo, the ouster of Soderini, and the restoration of the Medici in 1512 were participants in the Orti Orcellari. (lk 39)
Väga praktiline vastus problemaatilisele küsimusele, mis side on Platoni ja totalitarismi vahel.
The people move in succession from one power grab to another: from demanding the establishment of the tribunes, to possession of one consular office, then to both of them; from desiring the praetors and the censors for themselves to favoring a proto-Caesar such as Marius. The noble spokesmen accuse the people of using men such as Marius as a stick, “to beat down the nobility,” and hence accelerating the destruction of the republic. (lk 50-51)
Nõnda kõneleb grandi.
Clearly, the grandi will not cede any power to the people either out of the goodness of their hearts or on the basis of sound reasoning. And while Machiavelli seems willing to leave the dispute deadlocked, he suddenly resorts to an almost unannounced criterion to break the stalemate: the prospect of empire. (lk 51)
See on midagi, mida marksistid 20. sajandi alguses
taasavastavad: lihtne rahvas eelistab klassihuvidele imperialismi. Kui imperialismi eelistab ka kõrgklass, siis on klassihuvide probleem lahendatud.
Republics are usually ruined because the grandi empower a prince to help them dominate the people when laws and institutions are no longer at least partially sufficient to this end (D I.I6). Or, they are ruined because the people enlist a prince to protect them from the grandi when laws and institutions no longer do so (D I.7). Either way, the fault lies with the oppressive nature of the grandi. (lk 60)
Word.
One of Machiavelli’s principal intentions as far as the dedicatees are concerned is to make them ponder whether there is more to be gained long-term as Brutuses than as his ill-fated and rightfully ill-regarded sons. (lk 60)
Super! See annab Machiavelli tekstile eesmärgi. Küsimus,
millest paraku paljud mööda vaatavad. Peale „Politeia“ ja sellega seotud
sekundaarkirjanduse lugemist tahan ma alati mõista, kuidas on teksti tõlgendaja teksti eesmärgist aru
saanud, enne kui ma kedagi usaldan.
Kommentaare ei ole:
Postita kommentaar