Bhumics 14: The Pauper, Part 7

As we delve deeper into Machiavelli’s analysis, his exploration of political survival increasingly resembles a handbook for navigating our fragmented, securitarian globe. Having dissected virtues such as generosity, mercy, and fidelity through the cold lens of effectiveness, Machiavelli now shifts our attention to the dynamics of contempt, hatred, security, and greatness. In these chapters, we find principles eerily mirrored in today’s global politics, where public opinion and internal security shape the landscape of power, and where even fortresses—literal or metaphorical—offer precarious safety.

The Prince: Chapters 19-21

In this week’s reading, Machiavelli addresses how rulers should carefully manage the delicate balance of power and perception to avoid contempt, ensure security, and achieve an enduring legacy.

Contempt and Hatred

Machiavelli first cautions rulers against provoking hatred by seizing property or dishonoring subjects—especially women, reflecting Renaissance norms around family honor rather than personal rights. A ruler hated by his people lives perpetually at risk from conspiracies, he argues. This holds true today, where regimes that rob their citizens of wealth and dignity must invest heavily in internal security to stave off constant threats of rebellion.

What will make him despised is being considered inconstant, frivolous, effeminate, pusillanimous and irresolute: a ruler must avoid contempt as if it were a reef. He should contrive that his actions should display grandeur, courage, seriousness and strength, and his decisions about the private disputes of his subjects should be irrevocable. He should maintain this reputation, so that no one should think of lying to him or scheming to trick him.

Avoiding contempt, Machiavelli insists, is equally crucial. Frivolity, indecision, weakness—qualities despised universally—erode authority rapidly. Instead, rulers must project consistency, courage, and decisiveness, qualities authoritarian regimes today often emphasize through rigid displays of power. Machiavelli cleverly observes that conspiracies typically fail, as conspirators rarely secure widespread support. Popular goodwill thus acts as the strongest defense, reinforcing the lesson that strategic popularity, not democratic legitimacy, sustains authoritarian stability.

Security Measures and Fortresses

The second theme Machiavelli explores concerns practical security measures—arming or disarming citizens, managing internal factions, and constructing fortresses. Machiavelli sharply warns against disarming subjects. Disarmament, rather than enhancing security, creates resentment and vulnerability, leading rulers to depend on unreliable mercenaries or external powers. Today, authoritarian states frequently maintain significant armed citizen militias or paramilitary forces, precisely because armed loyalty stabilizes their regimes.

Fortresses are sometimes useful, then, and sometimes not; it depends on the circumstances. Moreover, if they help you in some respects, they will be harmful in others. The subject may be clarified in the following way: if a ruler is more afraid of his own subjects than of foreigners, he should build fortresses; but a ruler who is more afraid of foreigners than of his own subjects should not build them. The castle of Milan, built by Francesco Sforza, e has been and will be a source of more trouble to the Sforza family than any other disorder of that state. Hence, the best fortress a ruler can have is not to be hated by the people: for if you possess fortresses and the people hate you, having fortresses will not save you, since if the people rise up there will never be any lack of foreign powers ready to help them.

The strategy of fostering factional divisions to maintain control is thoroughly condemned by Machiavelli. He describes this tactic as superficially clever but fundamentally weak, a viewpoint painfully illustrated today in countries where internal divisions, initially encouraged by ruling elites, have led to catastrophic state collapse when faced with external aggression.

Regarding fortresses, Machiavelli offers nuanced advice. Fortresses may offer temporary refuge, but ultimately, public goodwill is superior. A ruler who depends solely on fortresses risks isolation and betrayal. Today, nations erect walls and fences, physical and digital, believing themselves secure; yet these fortifications are often only symbols of insecurity, readily circumvented by determined adversaries or internal dissent.

Gaining Outstanding Reputation

Lastly, Machiavelli champions the strategic cultivation of reputation through extraordinary actions, decisive military campaigns, and consistent loyalty or enmity. He presents Ferdinand of Aragon as an exemplar, whose grand military exploits and ruthless religious purges of Moors elevated him from obscurity to prominence. Contemporary parallels abound: ambitious leaders frequently use aggressive foreign policies and spectacular military interventions to distract domestic audiences and bolster legitimacy.

Neutrality, Machiavelli insists, is dangerous and naive. Engaging decisively in alliances provides clear advantages, ensuring that a ruler remains influential and protected from isolation. Modern geopolitics echoes this principle vividly, where states routinely intervene or support conflicts abroad—not necessarily for ideological or humanitarian reasons, but to secure influence and strategic advantage.

A ruler is also highly regarded if he is either a true ally or an outright enemy, that is, if he unhesitatingly supports one ruler against another. This policy is always better than remaining neutral, since if two powerful rulers near you come to blows, either the eventual victor will become a threat to you, or he will not. In either situation, it will always be wiser to intervene in favour of one side and fight strongly. For in the former situation, if you do not declare yourself, you will always be liable to be despoiled by the victor (which would please and satisfy the loser), and you will deservedly be defenceless and friendless. For the victor does not want unreliable allies who did not help him when he was hard pressed; and the loser will not show you any favour, because you did not want to run the risk of sharing his fate by assisting him militarily.

Furthermore, Machiavelli advises rulers to visibly support talent, commerce, agriculture, and public entertainment, all carefully calibrated to maintain public favor without diminishing authority. Today, leaders who cultivate national pride through achievements in arts, sports, technology, or symbolic infrastructure—while tightly controlling expressions of dissent—often enjoy substantial domestic support, regardless of international criticism.

Contemporary Reflections

Machiavelli’s advice on managing contempt and hatred resonates disturbingly with contemporary global politics, particularly within authoritarian regimes. Leaders such as Putin, Xi Jinping, and Erdoğan meticulously craft images of strength, decisiveness, and consistency, avoiding contempt through carefully choreographed public appearances and rigorously controlled media narratives. However, beneath these carefully cultivated images lies a brutal suppression of dissent, manipulation of national resources, and strategic deployment of fear and coercion.

In our securitarian globe, the notion of fortresses has taken on new meanings. Physical fortifications such as walls, fences, and border patrols proliferate worldwide—from the U.S.-Mexico border to the European Union's boundaries—demonstrating symbolic gestures of strength intended to reassure domestic populations. Yet, these barriers often prove counterproductive, escalating hostility, encouraging illicit smuggling networks, and inadvertently intensifying internal divisions. Furthermore, digital fortresses—firewalls, censorship algorithms, and extensive surveillance infrastructures—similarly claim to protect citizens while, in practice, reinforcing authoritarian power structures and limiting genuine security.

The contemporary fixation on reputation and extraordinary actions is evident in global leaders’ pursuits of spectacular geopolitical maneuvers. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China’s aggressive territorial claims in the South China Sea, the proposed wall at the southern border of the US etc exemplify how leaders harness military and diplomatic campaigns to reinforce domestic authority and international prestige. These actions, though risky, successfully divert attention from internal problems and solidify rulers’ positions, precisely as Machiavelli advocated.

Additionally, modern rulers adhere to Machiavelli’s caution against neutrality, evident in contemporary geopolitical alliances. Smaller nations often face intense pressure to align with major powers, such as the U.S., China, or Russia, choosing sides not based on ideological affinity but strategic survival. This alignment frequently occurs at the cost of national autonomy, precisely as Machiavelli foresaw, underscoring the perpetual vulnerability of weaker states.

The Pauper’s Perspective

From the perspective of the pauper—ordinary citizens navigating this Machiavellian landscape—the implications are stark yet illuminating. Where rulers avoid contempt and hatred through careful manipulation, paupers must develop acute awareness of these deceptive practices. Recognizing the discrepancy between rulers’ proclaimed virtues and their actual behaviors—such as governments claiming unity while deliberately stoking division—enables citizens to resist manipulation.

The pauper’s true strength lies not in fortifications or militarized defenses, but in collective solidarity and trust within communities. Machiavelli’s warnings against disarmament by rulers illuminate the importance of collective agency rather than individual armament. Contemporary paupers find security by fostering mutual aid networks, communal resilience, and transparency—practices that empower individuals and limit rulers' capacity for exploitation.

Furthermore, while rulers strategically abandon neutrality to maintain power, paupers too must recognize the pitfalls of neutrality. In a deeply polarized world, political apathy and disengagement often equate to silent complicity. Active and informed participation, grounded in clear commitments to social justice, environmental sustainability, and human rights, becomes essential. By aligning clearly with shared moral and ethical values, paupers build resilient social networks capable of withstanding authoritarian manipulations.

Ultimately, Machiavelli’s pragmatic realism, while unsettling, provides valuable lessons for paupers seeking strategies of resistance. Genuine virtue, not the performative virtue practiced by rulers, is the strongest defense against Machiavellian power plays. Authentic trust, empathy, and mutual support create robust communities capable of challenging oppressive power structures. Rather than mere idealism, these practices represent concrete, strategic actions necessary for surviving and thriving in a Machiavellian world.