Monarchy or Democracy? Sovereign or Minion? Does man make society evil, or is man made evil by society? Two philosophers so precise in their work yet so opposite their beliefs helped mold the criteria of human society. Through intricate steps and improbable ideas, two men showed us both organized society and complete tyranny. And for what reason, Machiavelli's "Prince" stated what worked to get "ultimate" power through observing the actions of others before him, and also through the understanding of human nature (or the way he saw it). On the other hand, Rousseau's "Social Contract" explained to us how to cultivate society, to fight evil brought about by society, and make a livable community. But one question still stands, where does each man stand on the "might makes right" aspect of human nature? When is resorting to might acceptable? And when might is used, does it make a certain incident right? Does being strong justify any actions of the strongest? .
In the 16th century the European nation was shocked by the ideas revealed by one man in his book, "The Prince". Machiavelli was simply an observer, and his book showed the flaws and wrong doings of aristocrats across the land. Machiavelli was not an immoral man, but not necessarily a very moral man, but the writings in his book are not his own ideas, simply observations.
Later, during the Enlightenment, a new idea of politics came to light. Assembled by a man named of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Rousseau formed an elaborate form of democracy where people come together and sacrifice certain rights for the better of themselves and the community. His book "The Social Contract" created a society with a populace, also known as the Sovereign, which helped decide laws, vote for a legislator, and determine a General Will. .
The concept of "might makes right" is found all throughout Machiavelli's "Prince". If you can put down the people or be stronger than the people you can control the people.
