There is a strong distinction between modern philosophy and ancient philosophy. The difference mainly comes in the way issues are handled about the prevailing situation and circumstances. Ancient philosophy was based more on Greek teachings which were mythological, an example of such mythologies are those of Aristotle. No truth could be found in the myths and were drawn mainly to give leaders a basis on which they can establish their leadership. The authors of ancient philosophy did not have any genuine experience in matters of leadership and mainly based their theories on some mystical happenings that nobody knows about their existence (Morgan, p. 28). In as much as there were strong points and lessons presented in them; they can no longer be applicable in modern political thought. Machiavelli is a modern philosopher that has derived reasonable arguments for modern leaders from his observations of the past. Greek philosophers emphasize the importance of understanding the needs of the people and hence sacrificing all to ensure that they are met. There is some reality in his work that can be adopted by the current leaders who want to experience a change in leadership. As we focus on the challenges that modern leaders especially in America face, we will be looking at the views of Machiavelli in comparison to what the ancient philosophers had to say.
Greek philosophy played a major role in instilling wisdom and character among its leaders (Morgan, 2005). It was mainly based on certain spiritual mythologies that were believed to have occurred some time back. They are mainly narratives of certain Heroes who either lost or won because of engaging in certain activities (Morgan, 2005). The stories signified that for a leader to achieve a certain goal then they had to go through a certain epic experience or journey which would, in turn, define their character. This philosophical thought became a major basis of leadership until when it was discovered how unpractical they were. With the changing societal needs, it becomes obvious that some principles can not be applied. They emphasize much on the importance of being divinely connected even when such spirituality does not make sense. Furthermore, modern society embraces more secular values than ancient spiritual values. Thus, it became challenging for modern leaders who can not identify with such philosophies. In trying to connect how events were unfolding in ancient times and how they are currently unfolding, there is a need for a different interpretation of the philosophies that were previously presented. It is for this reason that modern philosophy took a keen interest in the views presented by Machiavelli in defining leadership in the current society.
Machiavelli is a philosopher that insists on following the correct leadership values for politicians. His concept of ‘effectual truth’ vs. the imagination of it was a significant departure from the values of his day, this implies that leaders should be more realistic about the policies that they set forth rather than simply doing it to lure voters. Correct values to him do not necessarily mean what is generally acceptable. They are based on the political situation of the country as well as the ability of a leader. As much as Machiavelli does not believe in dictatorial leadership, he believes in an independent leader who does not need to be swayed by people’s ideologies. When in leadership, a person already has his obligations that they need to see fulfilled by the time their term is over. As they looked forward to being in a leadership position, they should have already seen a desire which they want to be fulfilled (Machiavelli, 1938). The moment they get into leadership and forget what took them there, they may start being pushed to do what other people want rather than fulfill the desires they had for that particular society. The reason why most leaders change once they enter into leadership is simply that they bow to the pressures of other people who don’t understand their vision.
In his literature titled ‘the prince’, Machiavelli points out some of the things that a prospective leader needs to do for them to occupy the bigger seat. He also has a word for those that are in leadership and what they can do to maintain their leadership position. His ideas are not based on any faulty methodologies but rather having the interest of a state at heart, the title is a reflection of how a prospective leader can do much more than what the former did (Machiavelli, 1938). People have become more knowledgeable and will look out for leaders that can handle their social and political needs. People have had a test of many leaders, how they carried out their campaigns and what they were able to deliver to them once in leadership positions. This has made them more intelligent when it comes to exercising their voting rights. It is not usually about the party that the leader chooses to campaign on but their morals. At a point when people are hungry for change, they can scrutinize their leaders and identify who is likely to deliver what they are saying. There are several issues in the country that every leader endeavors to fight. Machiavelli has not only identified the areas but also came up with procedures that may be used by such leaders to fight them.
One of the issues that have been pointed out is terrorism which has become a major issue, especially in the United States. The country has become a major target for terrorists which is making leaders look out for leaders that will promise an end to it. Potential leaders are those that understand the history of the land and are determined to bring change. On the contrary, those that are out for fame may not care much about past mistakes and will out trying out new things that may not necessarily be practical. They have heard leaders who have not done much in fighting it. Citizens are always looking up to their leaders to come up with policies that will instill security. Security has become a fundamental issue in economic growth without which people live in fear. After several bombings in the US and other officers in other countries that are affiliated with them, people are expressing doubt on the ability of their leaders to maintain security. Some of the strategies that have been employed have only sucked into the government coffer and given the country a bad name rather than fulfilling its objectives. Most of the funds that were set aside were channeled into fighting terrorism, a battle that seems to have no end. In his reference to defending the nation, Machiavelli suggests that sound policies and a strong military force are the basic requirements.
Compared to other philosophies that have been used for leadership, Machiavelli’s have been considered to be the best for application in the modern world. This is basically due to the changing needs in leadership. During the ancient years, people were more concerned about reforms and looked for leaders that could implement them. However, as it now stands, people are looking for leaders that can unite them and protect their interests from attacks. The greatest threat in America is security; security can only be facilitated if there are sound policies for the same as well as maintaining a strong military. Those are the principles that have been emphasized by Machiavelli which are also applicable to America today (Machiavelli, 45). The reality of the same may have been experienced in the world and America at large during the first and second world wars (Machiavelli, 1938). Many nations were proved to be lacking in military supremacy as they faced the consequences of war. It has taken quite some time before such nations recovered from the economic crunch that was experienced after the two wars. It was realized that they need to prepare their military ready for any battle and also set some funds aside for such emergencies.
America is one of the countries that have had a lot of experiences in leadership. Each leader has had an impact on the country, some that are cherished as positive while others as negative. It was basically because of the desire for justice and change that has motivated the country to vote for new leaders over and again. Some mistakes were made by the leaders that were previously there that are costing the nation a lot. They failed to meet the targets that they had set during their campaign rallies and hence leaving the other generation of leaders with a lot more to do. Before a new regime comes in, they have to first ensure that the blunders that were made by the previous regime are cleared before setting out afresh. This has affected the economic and political standing of the nation as every leader aims at making a remarkable change. People are still looking out with a lot of optimism that the leaders they choose will facilitate the much-needed change.
Works cited
- Machiavelli, N. (1938). The prince. New York: Plain Label Books.
- Morgan, M., (2005). Classics of moral and political theory. New York: Hackett Publishing