Philosophies

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli

The Prince was literally the inspiration for our podcast, though you might have heard mixed reviews about it. Basically, Machiavelli’s goal was that of most Renaissance artists: recreate an ideal. The advice Machiavelli gives are those principles that he has seen leaders from history use to be successful as leaders or “princes.” He offers a few methods for ruling the people: peacefully, coercively, or by force. The latter options are why the term “Machiavellian” is used to denote someone who is manipulative or two faced, though if you read his work, you’ll find that Machiavelli is very much against ruling by force and generally prefers leaders who allow the citizenry to govern themselves, without coercion, and to lose the respect of the people is the worst fate for any prince. We’ll probably disagree on this. 

The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene

When I first began reading this book, I was pretty sure I had accidentally joined a cult. The introduction is a bit intense. Also, I love that Greene refers to several people that I didn’t know before. He is also very fond of the subtlety of power, rather than the overt and blunt use of it. Very intriguing. We likely will not refer to this book often, but I thought I’d throw it in here if you’re looking for a book which is more “Machiavellian” than Machiavelli is.

Common Sense and The Rights of Man, by Thomas Paine

If you are wondering what it means to be an American, please read Common Sense. I was incredibly surprised to discover how much the belief that all men are created equal was instilled in man, but also how much this belief plays a part in our everyday actions. Then, in The Rights of Man, Paine builds on some of his ideas, mostly refuting Edmund Burke’s ideas. I’m still super interested in learning more about what Paine considers the duties of man, but I will let you know when I find out.

Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burke

If you came to me with this book and told me that it had been written today, I would completely agree with you that white privilege exists in the United States. This is basically an argument for the continued separation of the classes and the monarchy, which I feel like are easily taken apart. Burke makes some good arguments though, and it certainly made me think, but I still completely disagree with his point of view. Perhaps it’s the American in me.

The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau

In case you are wondering, I did take a lot of my reading list and literature from the same literature that Catherine the Great studied because, firstly, it made her the monarch she was, and secondly, it was a way to get to know her better. Reading The Social Contract helped me actually get inside her head a bit and explain why she decided not to go with a three branch government and keep herself as monarch. I love this book. If you want to understand government and society, you need to read it. It’s in the public domain! It’s free! Read it!!

Self Reliance by Ralph Waldo Emerson

In college, I can’t say that I was particularly “indoctrinated” to a specific point of view (except maybe in my postmodernism class), but I definitely was not taught the value behind the ideas that were conveyed in the works of American writers and philosophers, and I think Emerson is the greatest victim of that. Ironically, his message was to think for yourself and to be confident standing and believing on your own, and I went ahead and thought like my professor and all my other classmates.

Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau

You know that quote from Beauty and the Beast that Cogsworth says as a joke to himself… “if it’s not baroque, don’t fix it!” …and then he laughs to himself? The basic premise of this essay is that in order to point out how a system or law is broken or not working, you have to break it and make its idiosyncrasies obvious. This is one of the ways that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was able to push for women’s rights – people were accused of breaking the law or not following the law because of their gender. But the law should be gender neutral and should not discriminate – and so, to demonstrate this “brokenness” of the law, she took the case to the Supreme Court and the law was changed. This is the basic premise of Civil Disobedience.