Discourses on Livy

Rating:
Summary: A passionate testament to a highly held ideal!
Review: A careful translation, in modern English, of the Italian classic by Machiavelli. The translation strives for both accuracy and clarity, and the result is a modern English translation that never stoops to colloquial abstraction. The short introductory essay provides a helpful start for exploration of a complex work. The index of proper names, and the glossary (providing the translated Italian word beside the English) is thorough and very useful. In addition, the print quality of this book is delightful, particularly the visually appealing layout and typesetting, which makes the volume a pleasure to read, and a wonderful change from the paucity of visual design that goes into many versions of classics. This is a quality edition you'll want to add to your library, in either the hardcover or paperback versions. Recommended for anyone who would like to broaden their understanding of Machiavelli beyond The Prince.

Rating:
Summary: A Wonderful Translation of a Classic
Review: A careful translation, in modern English, of the Italian classic by Machiavelli. The translation strives for both accuracy and clarity, and the result is a modern English translation that never stoops to colloquial abstraction. The short introductory essay provides a helpful start for exploration of a complex work. The index of proper names, and the glossary (providing the translated Italian word beside the English) is thorough and very useful. In addition, the print quality of this book is delightful, particularly the visually appealing layout and typesetting, which makes the volume a pleasure to read, and a wonderful change from the paucity of visual design that goes into many versions of classics. This is a quality edition you'll want to add to your library, in either the hardcover or paperback versions. Recommended for anyone who would like to broaden their understanding of Machiavelli beyond The Prince.

Rating:
Summary: Another Machiavelli. Different from the often known one.
Review: No one who wants to have a fair outlook of the whole political reflexions of Machiavelli, might get it without reading "Discourses.." (Discorsi...). There the reader will find another kind of Machiavelli. Not The Prince's, but another thinker. Deeper and broader, the main topic rather than how to get the power (as along The Prince), is now how to stabilize it. Livy's work is just a motive for Machiavelli's analizes. So, the frequent reference to ancient Greek or Roman history, serves as comparative model regarding the actual Italian and the lager European exuberant political universe. Instead the prince needed to unify Italy and set it free from foreing powers, the central figure is a republic capable to keep liberty alive and a "virtuosa" social life, in terms of participation in the power exercise. Most of the conclusions keep still today a wise validity. That's why after "Discourses..." (albeit it seems The Prince was written in the middle of the former's one composition years) one can talk rightly about a "republican" Machiavelli. If he was not father, at least he was uncle (a bright one) of the since many years called "protective republicanism". In few words: the book put in evidence his very scope and stature. Doubtless, "Discourses..." show us another kind of Machiavelli. Different from the often known one. But still more, different than the ignored one (although ignorance never has been and impediment for many people to speak improperly about "Machiavelli", "machiavellism" and "machiavellic".)

Rating:
Summary: Another Machiavelli. Different from the often known one.
Review: No one who wants to have a fair outlook of the whole political reflexions of Machiavelli, might get it without reading "Discourses.." (Discorsi...). There the reader will find another kind of Machiavelli. Not The Prince's, but another thinker. Deeper and broader, the main topic rather than how to get the power (as along The Prince), is now how to stabilize it. Livy's work is just a motive for Machiavelli's analizes. So, the frequent reference to ancient Greek or Roman history, serves as comparative model regarding the actual Italian and the lager European exuberant political universe. Instead the prince needed to unify Italy and set it free from foreing powers, the central figure is a republic capable to keep liberty alive and a "virtuosa" social life, in terms of participation in the power exercise. Most of the conclusions keep still today a wise validity. That's why after "Discourses..." (albeit it seems The Prince was written in the middle of the former's one composition years) one can talk rightly about a "republican" Machiavelli. If he was not father, at least he was uncle (a bright one) of the since many years called "protective republicanism". In few words: the book put in evidence his very scope and stature. Doubtless, "Discourses..." show us another kind of Machiavelli. Different from the often known one. But still more, different than the ignored one (although ignorance never has been and impediment for many people to speak improperly about "Machiavelli", "machiavellism" and "machiavellic".)

Rating:
Summary: A passionate testament to a highly held ideal!
Review: The Romans believed that they had reached the pinnacle of development & the success of their Empire at its height certainly testified to that view. However, Machiavelli points out the strengths & weaknesses of their Political, Moral & Philosophical stance, stating where these pillars of their society shifted & how they contributed to its demise.

Rating:
Summary: Masterly written with principals still applicable today
Review: There are two mean reasons to read Machiavelli:
Firstly, Machiavelli gives in his books a deep insight in political and psychological principals. Some comment on how these principals are - at times - conflicting. This I find Machiavelli's main strength: he shows that choices need to be made, that there isn't an unconditional best choice, but that the best choice is dependent upon circumstances (he tries to give insight in the circumstances) and that the worst is not to choose (consistently).
For instance: when one conquers a city, one can subject it's inhabitants by being making them love you, or fear you. Which one chooses is also dependent on whether you attack a new city, or a city previously under your control, if one wants to make an example out of them (and what kind), etc. Most important however is that one must choice between making your subjects love you or hate you (you can't torture a person and then try to win his love).
Secondly, it is worth reading Machiavelli because of his literary abilities. He writes with charm, ease and lack of difficult words, he gives interesting and innovative illustrations, he has written two books that are real pageturners but that also give a new and deeper insight in society (so new that their books are still read today, and not just by literary scholars).

The general applicability of the principal used above, can be seen at relations (most couples stay together because of love, but some because they fear retribution by their partner), at parent/child level (parents either making their children obey because of fear of punishment, or by giving them a sense of responsibility and trust), at companies (a manager can motivate employees by either making them fear for losing their jobs, or by making them share company ideals and values) and at governmental level (Saddam ruled Iraq by fear, while a real democracy must be run by love - or at least lack of fear - for their leader).
At all the previous examples one can see that both situations can work, but the greatest mistake is not to make a consistent choice. It would be as great a mistake for Osama Bin Laden to try and win American love for the Islam by sending planes in the Twin Towers, as for Bush to try and win Iraqi love for democracy and justice by making a policy out of torturing unconvicted Iraqi's (and violating other civil rights). (Hopefully there will be an inquiry that will convince Iraqi's that the torture in the Abu Graib prison wasn't government policy, so that the faith in America, democracy and justice will be restored).