In one of my previous posts I talked about the Human Factor as crucial in every historical event [HERE] Now I am trying to justify my position by finding in the history of political thought the reason for my point of view. Even Machiavelli acknowledges that the human factor is what works in determining the historical occurrences
...to make my meaning plain, and not to part company with the men of whom I have
been speaking, I say, that as, on the one hand, we see Scipio enter Spain, and
by his humane and generous conduct at once secure the good-will of the
province, and the admiration and reverence of its inhabitants, so on the other
hand, we see Hannibal enter Italy, and by methods wholly opposite, to wit, by
violence and rapine, by cruelty and treachery of every kind, effect in that
country the very same results. For all the States of Italy revolted in his
favour, and all the Italian nations ranged themselves on his side.
When we seek to know why this was, several reasons present themselves, the
first being that men so passionately love change, that, commonly speaking,
those who are well off are as eager for it as those who are badly off: for as
already has been said with truth, men are pampered by prosperity, soured by
adversity. This love of change, therefore, makes them open the door to any one
who puts himself at the head of new movements in their country, and if he be a
foreigner they adopt his cause, if a fellow-countryman they gather round him
and become his partisans and supporters; so that whatever methods he may there
use, he will succeed in making great progress. Moreover, men being moved by two
chief passions, love and fear, he who makes himself feared commands with no
less authority than he who makes himself loved; nay, as a rule, is followed and
obeyed more implicitly than the other...[1]
[1] Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livius Book III Chapter XXI
...to make my meaning plain, and not to part company with the men of whom I have
been speaking, I say, that as, on the one hand, we see Scipio enter Spain, and
by his humane and generous conduct at once secure the good-will of the
province, and the admiration and reverence of its inhabitants, so on the other
hand, we see Hannibal enter Italy, and by methods wholly opposite, to wit, by
violence and rapine, by cruelty and treachery of every kind, effect in that
country the very same results. For all the States of Italy revolted in his
favour, and all the Italian nations ranged themselves on his side.
When we seek to know why this was, several reasons present themselves, the
first being that men so passionately love change, that, commonly speaking,
those who are well off are as eager for it as those who are badly off: for as
already has been said with truth, men are pampered by prosperity, soured by
adversity. This love of change, therefore, makes them open the door to any one
who puts himself at the head of new movements in their country, and if he be a
foreigner they adopt his cause, if a fellow-countryman they gather round him
and become his partisans and supporters; so that whatever methods he may there
use, he will succeed in making great progress. Moreover, men being moved by two
chief passions, love and fear, he who makes himself feared commands with no
less authority than he who makes himself loved; nay, as a rule, is followed and
obeyed more implicitly than the other...[1]
[1] Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livius Book III Chapter XXI
No comments:
Post a Comment