Historically speaking, it tends to work.
The Machiavellian part was the fact he removed his rivals simultaneously without them gaining prior warning.
He was cunning like a fox to avoid detection and dangerous like lion when action was required.
Since this comment section turned into an arena discussing how to rule, here’s an interesting relevant CGP Grey video title The Rules for Rulers.
I too thought of this video
Historically speaking, it tends to work.
And for the record, Machiavelli didn’t exactly rule it out.
can someone explain me this?
There is a movie called “The Godfather”, which depicts a fictional war between mafia families in the US. In the film, there is an older generation that operates on a kind of respect system, and attempt to keep each other reasonably balanced, in both power and money terms. A drug dealer enters the picture, and attempts to murder Michael Carleone’s father (who is the Godfather). In response, Michael plans to meet the drug dealer and a corrupt police captain, sneak a gun into the meeting, and shoot them both. That plan works.
Later, the Godfather dies, Michael takes over as the head of the Carleone family, and plans assassinations of all of the older generation of every other family in a coordinated attack, during his father’s funeral. That plan works too, leaving him as the most powerful survivor.
Epic
That’s what machiavellian distills into - cold pragmatism and disregard of morality. So his turn from okay guy that wanted his family to stop with illegal shit into someone much worse than his father was portrays it perfectly.
Exactly. Machiavellian doesn’t mean galaxy brain.
deleted by creator
Unscrupulous is only one of the definitions.
Cunning and scheming are the other two. The Prince detailed how to gain and hold power.
It wasn’t a book that said immediately shoot everyone to solve all your problems.
So the original author was expecting violence in Godfather 2 but with more planning.
You gain and hold power by killing people you don’t like, look at any dictator that ever dictatored. 🙃
Again, yes you kill people. You don’t just kill everyone immediately without a plan. Even Pol Pot had a plan.
The funny thing is that Machiavelli didn’t achieve shit apart from write a treatise bitching about the people in charge of where he lived.
Also, knowing who to shoot and when to kill them is kind of a big deal.
The man who shot Don Vito thought he was untouchable because he was going to the meeting with a police captain.
Watch Gomorrah if you want to see real power games
They made a movie about the New Vegas casino?
I saw this movie at a press screening back then. I had to go to the bathroom from the very beginning, but I couldn’t because it was so damn thrilling. My bladder still hurts today when I think about it.
oh wow didnt know it was film, Ive only seen the series
The series is so good. I let a couple seasons build up, thanks for the reminder I need to get back into it.
I prefer Goncharov, personally
Omg, I forgot about Goncharov! Such a good movie.
it’s a shame they don’t make movies like goncharov these days
Movie or series?
both apparently, though I’ve only seen the series
'CAUSE IT HAS A VALID POINT TO MAKE, IT’S INSISTED!
What does that even mean?
It insists upon itself
It mean it’s trying to be deep, but is really just pretentious and shallow.
…with a gun, I think. He shoots them with the bullets a gun fires.
Anon once heard someone’s opinions about a movie character, decided it must be so. Having a mind locked up tighter’n Fort Knox if it were located deep inside Area 51, he was badly disappointed when the character didn’t match the wild expectations he set for himself.
The expectations were set by someone else. For me, the memes hyped the hell out of Khan and one day I decided to watch the trek movies. Yeah, Khan did not live up to the hype. I had seen much more interesting scifi villains and space battles by then.
It insists upon itself, Lois. It insists upon itself.
Keep it simple, stupid.
Huh? Was it?
