History’s Most Misunderstood Thinker

The truth about Machiavelli...

Niccolò Machiavelli is one of those rare figures who has become more of a myth than a man. A diplomat and political theorist in Renaissance Florence, he wrote one of the most notorious books in political history: The Prince.

To most people, mention of The Prince conjures up images of ruthless manipulation. The term "Machiavellian" is shorthand for cold, calculated evil, and Machiavelli’s philosophy is reduced to little more than "the ends justify the means" — a phrase he never actually wrote. Nevertheless, the Florentine philosopher remains popular culture’s patron saint of schemers and tyrants.

But it wasn’t always this way.

Over the past five centuries, Machiavelli has been embraced by thinkers across the political spectrum, with philosophers, revolutionaries, and political theorists of conflicting convictions all claiming him as their own. Thinkers as varied as Nietzsche, Strauss, Rousseau, Gramsci, Hegel, and Montesquieu each saw something different in Machiavelli’s work.

Some believed he was defending tyranny, others thought he was protecting liberty, and still others believed he was doing both at once.

Today we examine four different interpretations of Machiavelli’s work to see how he’s been used to justify different political theories, both in ages past and in our modern day. We’ll begin with the “classic” interpretations, and end with the counterintuitive.

Each reading offers a window into how Machiavelli is understood — but also, into how political reality itself can shift depending on who’s doing the reading…