Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- CONTENTS -- Abbreviations for Machiavelli's Writings -- Introduction. Vulgarity and Virtuosity: Machiavelli's Elusive "Effectual Truth" -- PART I -- 1 The Passion of Duke Valentino: Cesare Borgia, Biblical Allegory, and The Prince -- 2 "Keep the Public Rich and the Citizens Poor": Economic Inequality and Political Corruption in the Discourses -- 3 On the Myth of a Conservative Turn in the Florentine Histories -- PART II -- 4 Rousseau's Repudiation of Machiavelli's Democratic Roman Republic -- 5 Leo Strauss's Machiavelli and the Querelle between the Few and the Many -- 6 The Cambridge School's "Guicciardinian Moments" Revisited -- Summation. Scandalous Writings, Dubious Readings, and the Virtues of Popular Empowerment -- Notes -- Acknowledgments -- Index

"Intensifying economic and political inequality poses a dangerous threat to the liberty of democratic citizens. Mounting evidence suggests that economic power, not popular will, determines public policy, and that elections consistently fail to keep public officials accountable to the people. John P. McCormick confronts this dire situation through a dramatic reinterpretation of Niccol Machiavelli, 's political thought. Highlighting previously neglected democratic strains in Machiavelli's major writings, McCormick excavates institutions through which the common people of ancient, medieval, and Renaissance republics constrained the power of wealthy citizens and public magistrates, and he imagines how such institutions might be revived today. Machiavellian Democracy fundamentally reassesses one of the central figures in the Western political canon and decisively intervenes into current debates over institutional design and democratic reform. Inspired by Machiavelli's thoughts on economic class, political accountability and popular empowerment, McCormick proposes a citizen body that excludes socioeconomic and political elites and grants randomly selected common people significant veto, legislative, and censure authority within government and over public officials"--

This is the first in-depth critical appraisal in English of the political, legal, and cultural writings of Carl Schmitt, perhaps this century's most brilliant critic of liberalism. It offers an assessment of this most sophisticated of fascist theorists without attempting either to apologise for or demonise him. Schmitt's Weimar writings confront the role of technology as it finds expression through the principles and practices of liberalism. Contemporary political conditions such as disaffection with liberalism and the rise of extremist political organizations have rendered Schmitt's work both relevant and insightful. John McCormick examines why technology becomes a rallying cry for both right- and left-wing intellectuals at times when liberalism appears anachronistic, and shows the continuities between Weimar's ideological debates and those of our own age

Leo Strauss, inPhilosophy and Law(1935), offers Platonic theocracy as a more just and stable political alternative to both liberalism and authoritarianism. Rather than merely a scholastic investigation of medieval Jewish and Islamic philosophy, I read the book as a programmatic endorsement of a morally perfectionist political order: a divinely legitimated and rationally justified "true" or "beautiful" state. Since human beings require political community to suppress their evil inclinations and promote their disposition toward the good, Strauss criticizes liberalism for contending that government should remain neutral regarding good and evil and modern authoritarianism for effectively committing idolatry by politically instrumentalizing theology. I demonstrate that Strauss's long-neglected book is particularly relevant for our own "postsecular age," an age when adherents of religious orthodoxy increasingly demand concessions from liberal democracies and resurgent state authoritarianism frequently cloaks itself in religious trappings.

T his article argues against prevailing scholarly trends that theFlorentine Historiescontinues to delineate the ways through which Niccolò Machiavelli, inThe Princeand theDiscourses, advised potential founders or reformers to exploit, for their own benefit and that of their patria, the inevitable social conflicts between elites and the people that arise in all polities. Machiavelli demonstrates that, in particular, Giano della Bella and Michele di Lando could and should have attempted to imitate exemplary ancient founders and reformers whom he praises in previous works, especially Moses, Romulus, and Brutus. Machiavelli implicitly criticizes Giano and Michele for failing to spiritedly invigorate new laws with necessary and salutary violence; for neglecting to effectively manage the "envy" of rival peers; for not resisting the allure of "middle ways" between difficult political choices; and for failing to militarily organize or mobilize the entirety of Florence's common people.