When we hear the word corruption today we automatically tend to associate it with a brown envelope, a kickback or a bung, things that are corrupting to the ‘individual’ and by extention to the state also. It is ironic then that Machiavelli’s name has become synonymous with the word because for Machiavelli himself, corruption was a bit more esoteric, for him it was: ‘that which prevents the Republic from attaining a high status of excellence in military and public affairs which if left unchecked will cause a complete degeneration of the state or prevent a good one from being set up in the first place’. It sounds at first like a very Christian take on politics but he had specific ideas on the role of the church. The main difficulty remains the interpretation of his term ‘Virtue’. Machiavelli’s’ language is of the everyday kind and at first glance ‘The Prince’ and to a lesser extent ‘The Discourses’ can seem like ‘an advertisement for wickedness’, where he seems to say that whatever action to be taken for the ‘common good’ is acceptable and that cynical skills are an important part of a rulers C.V. However this is to ignore the foundations upon which this exchange takes place. There are two types of virtue, one ‘civic’, and the other ‘military’. It is this interpretation by commentators of ‘virtue’ as: ‘that which is correct’, that has tarred Machiavelli and set him up as the first ever amoral ‘technocrat’ of all time, but this is not so, even if he was at the best of times a bit too plain speaking for his own good.
What is corruption?
There is then the ‘virtue’ of the ruler and that of the populace at large which require distinct talents but because of this ambiguity of meaning it is first important to understand what he sees as being the ways in which a state can descend into factionalism and what corrosive influences are to be avoided. Machiavelli does not see friction and political action by the plebs as an indication of this corruption but as a sign of health, so long as it doesn’t run riot.
He starts the Discourses by stating that people are ‘essentially greedy’ and is relentlessly grim about human nature. The primary evil is the existence of a separatist elite pursuing personal goals in contradiction to the public interest. The general idea of corruption is the obsessive pursuit of personal individual wealth and title instead of common wealth and goods and adherence to communitarian values. The rulers of the state define what this public interest or common good is and the apparatus of government is accordingly constructed to achieve this end, as we shall see. He states that steering a middle course being neither wholly good nor bad will lead to weakness of rule and act as a fan to faction. However, if there is a tradition of laws and a history of ‘virtue’ then there may be a framework for salvation in spite of ineffective government. At the same time he clearly states that ‘a prince who does what he likes is a lunatic’ and he never recommended evil just for the sake of it, saying that those kinds of actions will always bring ruin.
How to prevent it?
Machiavelli likes to look to the circularity of history for solutions in The Discourses’ and proves his points using classical models. In the establishment of the state in the first instance, it is important to consider the idle rich. In a state, which has a lot of this, then the best course may be a ‘just’ monarchy of some sort until such a time as a republic can be established as they will probably ignore any laws, which are devised to increase equality. His ideal solution is to get rid of all royalty because aristocracy is preferable to monarchy. Not an aristocratic elite but a cabinet of all ranks of civilians, taking the best citizens and privileging them in the right way while applying force to the rest. (Discourses: I.55) By privilege, he means influence and not necessarily personal wealth. It’s important to ‘keep the state rich and the citizens poor’. (Discourses: III.16). State wealth is communal wealth. Seeing as the rich always seek to secure what they have causing division in the process, the trick is to ensure that it’s more advantageous for every citizen to gain favour by public service than factious alliances.
Inequality continues to preoccupy us. Equality of opportunity is taken for granted while we continue to look for ways to ensure equality of outcome. Machiavelli appeals both to liberal and conservative traditions. He is resolutely compatible with modernity in the sense that he felt there could be no political utopia, only balance between factions. Finally, he is an optimist, the most successful and virtuous republic is one who can postpone conflict and war for the longest time while providing for the highest possible level of equality. His belief is that if you get this balance right, civic virtue can be instilled in the populace, their ability to participate, understand and change politics can be established and he also believes it can last indefinitely.
0 comments:
Post a Comment