In many spaces, especially those burdened with making sense of habitual political mischief, Machiavelli needs no introduction. Much of this fame is hinged on his small book, The Prince, published in 1521. While some of his other books, such as Discourses on Livy speak to democratic values, The Prince is often read in isolation and taken to be all there is to Machiavelli’s political views.
Thus, his scholarly reputation is that of an evil thinker that equipped politicians of all time with tools of dictatorship. I have a feeling that many who cite Machiavelli have never bothered to read the book or understand its political background. In our Ugandan context, though, this is not unique to Machiavelli’s book.
Perhaps, with the exception of the Bible and Qur’an, many of the books we so authoritatively cite, we have never touched a page of them.
The Prince was purposely written to speak to the Italian political situation at the time. In the author’s imagination, given the political divisions at the time, Italy needed a strong leader to unify it – and he felt that this could not be done by following democratic precepts.
At a personal level, though, it has been noted that Machiavelli also sought to use the book to win the favour of the ruling Medici class for special considerations – a strategy that landed on its nose. It is, however, easy to understand why the African audience sees a couple of its leaders in the book.
Though these leaders (rulers) may not have read it, it typifies their leadership style and political manoeuvres in ways that have practically immortalised the text. Machiavelli must have had in mind as the basis of his recommendations the needs of a cunning power-drunken figure.
In this regard, The Prince and George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) could be placed in the same category. While the latter was originally conceived as a satirical critique of socialism as compared to capitalism, it has come to characterise betrayal politics in various settings – often with little or no care about its initial purposes.
Well, perhaps that’s part of what literary work is for – that everyone should read it from their standpoint. Therefore, any Ugandan thinking that Machiavelli wrote for the likes of Mr Museveni can be understood, just as we would understand any political analyst that makes sense of Mr Museveni’s political behaviour through the lenses of The Prince.
Machiavelli advises the prince (read president) to be as cunning as a fox and as fierce as a lion. What of this haven’t we seen? Is it the efforts to wear a publicly appealing image while ruthlessly acting through state agencies and pawns to hammer opponents?
Yes, as a fox, wear a patriotic coat. Show your readiness to work with anyone, while you actually mean working with those who are willing to submit to your will. Show that those that do not work with you are the problem.
Didn’t we see, after kidnapping and brutalising NUP supporters, the prince addressing us with an amiable smile that he is working well with other opposition parties but only NUP was not forthcoming?
Indeed, true to Machiavelli’s counsel, it is good to be loved, but the prince needs to know when to evoke fear.
“It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both”. Love can always be withdrawn, and therefore not reliable. Fear can be commanded and sustained. So, play nice and democratic, but when people start thinking that you are on top at their mercy, pull out your claws and show them that power actually lies in you.
Let the constitutional rhetoric of ‘power belongs to the people’ continue to excite the populace, while deep inside you as prince know that it is tightly filled with ceremonial emptiness. Once in a while, round up and arbitrarily throw to jail an opponent’s entire campaign team. This way, sober them up to the reality of where power lies.
There are these promises you make as a leader, such as retiring at some point. Should they be kept? Not really.
“The promise given was a necessity of the past; the word broken is a necessity of the present … A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise”.
He is advised to only keep faith when it serves him. Machiavelli tells the leader that people are so simple to manipulate and deceive to the extent that whoever deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived. Package your deceit so well in proverbs and jokes, and many will lower their guard as they laugh in bemusement over your folk wisdom.
How about holding values? Shouldn’t the prince espouse strong moral and religious principles? Not necessarily. In the broad scale of things for the prince, “politics have no relation to morals”. What matters most is what is useful to keep in charge.
If it pays, the prince should appear to share popular social values. In a society where religious sentiments are of popular appeal, quote religious books such as the Bible as frequently as you can. Organise national prayer days.
“Men judge generally more by the eye than by the hand, for everyone can see and few can feel. Everyone sees what you appear to be, few really know what you are”. Therefore, just show them what you want them to use to form an impression of you.
Reading all this from where we stand, we cannot be blamed for our suspicion of Machiavelli as the godfather of our predicament. He might have written over six centuries ago in a confused take at his own mess, yet his text stubbornly lingers all over our affairs like a bad perfume.
jsssentongo@gmail.com
The author is a teacher of philosophy.
