Machiavelli vs. Donald Trump

Once again, with the assistance of the spirit medium in Florence, I was able to summon the great political philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli from the netherworld where he mournfully dwells. Our previous two meetings had been at restaurants personally associated with him, the first outside of Florence and the second in Seattle, Washington, but this time, perhaps because of the subject matter I intended to discuss with him, I had a hankering for us to meet in the nation’s capital. In searching the terms “Machiavelli” and “Washington, D.C.” together, however, I came across a November 2016 article in The Washington Post by David Ignatius called “Donald Trump Is The American Machiavelli.” I thought it would make for an amusing start to our conversation if I shared it with him. 

 “Niccolò,” I said, “Guarda questo! Look at this!” He perused the piece for a short while, after which a rueful smile crossed his face. He read aloud from it: 

“To say that Trump displays attributes that Machiavelli deemed necessary in the fractious, perpetually warring states of the 16th century is not to recommend him as a modern leader. Nobody would want a neo-feudal dictator to lead a 21st-century democracy, you might think. But the American public voted Tuesday for Trump, perhaps in part because it shares Machiavelli’s concept of strength, or as he liked to call it, ‘virtue.’” 

Niccolò paused his reading and looked at me. “Who is this David Ignatius?” 

“He is a columnist for The Washington Post and is a leading expert on foreign affairs.” 

“Well, he may be an expert on foreign affairs,” Niccolò said, “but not on my political philosophy. He has made the common mistake of thinking that my short treatise, The Prince, expresses the whole of my political philosophy. That is not the case. And to associate me with such a person as your Donald Trump! That is a terrible thing. 

“Also,” Niccolò continued, “Ignatius clearly misunderstands the word virtù, which does not equate to the English word virtue. It is much more complex, with many dimensions, and a capacity for ruthlessness in certain extreme circumstances is only one of them.”

“In what circumstances would it be appropriate?”

“I hope that this will not be the case, but such circumstances may soon be upon you. Trump has made it clear that he intends to be president of the United States whether he is legitimately elected or not. He intends to get there by any means necessary. I keep track of your columns, and I know you have written one suggesting that American liberals prepare themselves for possible mass violence from Trump and his supporters.”

“Yes,” I rejoined, “but first we must work to make sure Trump does not get elected. As we have discussed in the past, luck, or Fortuna, and virtù, a kind of composite political excellence, are the variables that determine political outcomes. In 2016, Fortuna, the goddess of luck in your framework, smiled on Donald Trump, for whatever reason. Perhaps the goddess felt it was time to punish liberals for falling prey to the siren song of neoliberalism, a political theory that puts financial markets at the center of economic policy rather than the welfare of the masses of American people. Next time around, Fortuna turned against Trump, and he lost, massively in the popular vote though narrowly in the Electoral College. This time, there is dramatic evidence that Fortuna is strongly on the side of the Democratic ticket, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.”

“What evidence is that, exactly?”

“While Joe Biden was still the candidate for president, Democrats were in the doldrums, and Republicans were riding high. Donald Trump felt sure of winning the presidency again and was boastfully proclaiming that he would. But the minute Joe Biden stepped out on the stage in what was to be their first debate, looking like a sickly and befuddled lost soul, the political environment shifted dramatically, and Biden was persuaded to withdraw. If that debate had not been scheduled when it was, if it had taken place in September after the Democratic convention, as it was supposed to, Democrats would not be in the advantageous position they are now. That debate could be considered a world-historical piece of luck!

“And now, Niccolò, prego—if you please—give a discourse on the elements of virtù that the two Democratic candidates must display in order to maintain the favor of Fortuna and win the election.”

“I am credited with challenging Aristotle’s three-part division of political systems: Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Democracy, each one having a degenerate; or Tyranny, Oligarchy, or Mobocracy, in their degenerated forms. I argued, and argue still, that there are at base really only two categories of political systems, Tyranny or a Republic. A Republic is a form of government in which all the members of a polity participate, and a Tyranny is the opposite, one in which only a few hold meaningful power, be it an oligarchy or a single tyrant holding sway over everybody else. It could not be more clear that Signore Trump has aspirations to dismantle America’s republican form of government, created by your founders, and replace it with a tyranny of which he will be in total control. But looking at the opponents Donald Trump faces, I see Kamala Harris and Tim Walz as people with great virtù, along with a corresponding gift of great humor, which the goddess also appreciates, as does the American public. The economic program she outlined recently is a good step in the direction of reversing the decline of economic equality that began for your country in the 1970s and 1980s.

“And now, arrivederci, my friend. I must be off, to the dark depths where I normally dwell.”