I have to say I am really enjoying reading Machiavelli. I would describe him as one of the first existential political philosophers. Here is a passage I read today to illustrate my point.

"But since my intention is to say something that will prove of practical use to the inquirer, I have thought it proper to represent things as they are in a real truth, rather then as they are imagined. Many have dreamed up republics and principalities which have never in truth been known to exist; the gulf between how one should live and how one does live is so wide that a man who neglects what is actually done for what should be done moves towards self-destruction rather then self-preservation."

So rare is it to find a passage like this in philosophy that when I read it had to stop and read it again. This is the kind of thinking that made me want to get into philosophy in the first place. It is easy to create false worlds and systems of living that will give the results that one wishes to see, but it is far harder to take the world as it is and offer suggestions about how to deal with it. Which is precisely what Machiavelli is trying to do. Much the same as Sarte and other existential philosophers were attempting. One must live in this world so why not deal with issues that are focused on this world.

I really love how that whole passage could be seen as a not so subtle dig at Plato and his fantastic other world creations. It is all well and good to lay out how a republic out to be created and the types of people that ought to be created to live in it but what use is that to us who do not live in that fantasy. It is far better to stick to being-in-the-world.

This is another reason why a lot of people criticize Machiavelli for being fickle and hypocritical with his philosophy, but that is because that is how the world is. It is always changing and is never the exact same as it used to be. This is why he will say one thing and then go on to say the exact opposite a few passages later. One has to deal with the world as it is before you not as you would have it be. Hence the lack of true answers in Machiavelli and instead just suggestions and questions, which are far more valuable then simple answers.

Anyway props to Machiavelli for being as far as I can tell the first existential political philosopher.