Taking off teh Rose-colored-glasses: Selfish Motivation

Joy Prior
Honors Civilization 202- 005
Comparison Paper
Word Count 1,255 words
Taking off the Rose-colored-glasses: Selfish motivation
There comes a point in someone’s life when they have to take off their rose-colored-glasses and admit that no matter how much they “don’t like” something is it can still be true. I have always known that many rulers have selfish motivations, but there were certain things I thought were safe. After I read Machiavelli’s The Prince and More’s Utopia I realized that seemingly selfless actions such as the distribution of wealth, the establishment of laws for the upper class, and religion affiliation can be emplaced by the ruling class so that they can maintain power.
The ruling class controls the distribution of wealth in order to suppress a revolution. Chapter XVI in The Prince explains that a prince should “without injury to himself practice the virtue of liberality so that it may be known (Machiavelli 41).” Machiavelli identifies two sources of money a prince can use: his subjects and those he conquers. The former he should spend frugally but the second he should spend generously. When he distributes his wealth a prince should be most interested in doing so “without injury to himself.” A similar theme is described in Utopia. The ruling class (governor and senate) require criminals to wear gold and silver chains as a symbol of their crimes. This unique punishment does not only distinguishes criminals from law abiding citizens but it keeps the commoners from wondering what the ruling class is doing with its accumulated wealth. Raphael Hythloday recalled that, “if in Utopia gold and silver were kept locked up in some tower, smart fools among the common people might concoct a story that the governor and senate were out to cheat ordinary folk and get some advantage for themselves (More 60).” In this case the ruling class prevented rebellion by distributing the wealth. Both in Utopia and The Prince the ruling class parted with gold, silver, and diamonds in order to protect themselves from an angry populace.
Rulers establish laws for themselves to maintain power over their subjects and not to practice self control. Machiavelli states that being hated by ones subjects is the worst thing a prince can be, because if citizens hate their leader they are less likely to sacrifice their lives, family, or property to defend the kingdom. Fear and hatred are two different things. The first a prince should establish before developing love with his subjects, “because men are a sorry breed,” and love can be “broken on every whisper of private interest; but fear is bound by the apprehension of punishment which never relaxes its grasp (Machiavelli 44).” Yet, a prince should avoid being perceived as cruel and hated by his subjects “where it enables him to keep his subjects united and obedient (Machiavelli 43).” Conclusively Machiavelli believes that a prince should show mercy to keep his subjects “obedient” to his commands. All a prince has to do to avoid hatred and keep submission is “not meddle with the property or with the women of his citizens”, but other issues of mercy, including executions, depend upon the situation (Machiavelli 44). Laws restricting a prince from abusing his subjects property or women are not emplaced simply to establish moral values, but because he wants “obedient” subjects. Utopia describes a society adjacent to the Utopians, the Macarians. In that kingdom a king established a law that limited his own and future king’s wealth that can be kept in the royal treasury. Among other benefits this law creates a king “feared by evil-doers, and just as much beloved by the good” in his kingdom (More 34). The result was that the king was “feared by evil-doers,” but what is evil about expecting a king to distribute his wealth. Just as Machiavelli suggested, this king established a law for himself that restricted his control over the property of his subject, because he did not want “evil-doers” to have reason to question his authority. The fear that his citizens will hate him is enough for a prince to restrict himself from his subjects property and women.
Rulers must take into account that men will honor their God before their government. Machiavelli does not mention that a prince should be afraid of the power God, but of the power of the church. He believes that allowing church authorities to exercise power in a kingdom undermines the authority of the prince. The Prince states that an Ecclesiastical Princedom, kingdoms where the prince is the divine source, is the hardest to obtain but the easiest to maintain (Machiavelli 28). Many religions are based outside of the jurisdiction of one specific kingdom. This causes international disputes, eventually leading even the King of France to “tremble” at the power of the church (Machiavelli 29). A wise prince recognizes the influence of religion on his kingdom; not primarily because of his beliefs but because of his subjects’ beliefs. Utopia views religion in a similar manner to Machiavelli. God is ambiguously defined by the Utopians to such an extent that “in the churches no images of the gods are seen, so that each person may be free to form his own image of God according to his own religion, in any shape he pleases (More 101).” Yet, the religious priest is revered by the citizens to the point that “as the priest in his robes appears… the stillness is so complete that the scene strikes one with awe, as if a divinity were actually present (More 102).” The priest is the highest authoritative figure in Utopia, and he is physically recognized more easily by the people than the divine. More significant he is one of the advisors to the senate and ruling class, and there is nothing “seen or heard in the churches that does not square with all the creeds (More 100).” Just as Machiavelli illustrated, the Utopian ruling class includes religious figures to ensure there is no competition of authority in their society.
The Prince by Machiavelli and Utopia by More exposed to me how the distribution of wealth, moral conduct, and religion affiliation can become a strategy for the ruling class to keep power over their subjects. In the Utopian Kingdom and the ideal princedom described in The Prince the ruling classes feared their subjects enough to part with gold, silver, and diamonds in order to maintain control. A wise prince such as the king in Macarians (a kingdom near the Utopians) avoids being hated by his citizens by restricting himself in how much he uses his citizens’ wealth. The ruling classes included religious figures in their government to ensure there is not a competition for authority in their society. Here I go; I took off my rose colored glasses, and realized that many leaders today and anciently view their citizens’ happiness as a side-effect of protecting themselves. Kingdoms, and even the idealized Utopia have a ruling class afraid of their subjects to the point that they are willing to give up silver and gold, submit themselves to laws, and develop a mock religion. Although “I don’t like” this idea the nice thing about taking off rose-colored-glasses is not everything is one color anymore but unique colors and shades, creating a world that is more intricate and diverse than I could have ever imagined.


















Work Cited
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Ed. Stanley Appelbaum and Philip Smith. Trans. N. H. Thomson. Dover:
Dover Publications, 1992.

More, Thomas. Utopia. Ed. George M. Logan and Robert M. Adams. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006.