In order to be successful according to Machiavelli, a ruler must be willing to sacrifice doing good. Machiavelli states that if a prince wants to maintain his power, he must “learn to be able not to be good, and to use this and not use it according to necessity” (61). Machiavelli believes that a ruler must be morally fluid in order to remain powerful. Instead of pursuing virtue and striving to do good, Machiavelli believes that in order to be truly successful a ruler must be willing to do whatever it takes to gain ultimate power. Machiavelli uses Cesare Borgia as an example of someone who gained power in what he considers an effective way. Cesare Borgia was appointed duke by his father, Pope Alexander IV (27). After describing in detail the bloody rise of Cesare Borgia to power, Machiavelli says he doesn’t know how he can call the duke out on his less than praiseworthy actions; rather, Machiavelli believes “he should be put forward (...) to be imitated by all those who have risen to empire through fortune and arms of others” (32). I believe that a person in a position of power can keep his moral values and still be successful. For example, Marcus Aurelius was a successful ruler despite the fact he is considered a great philosopher. The difference is how the success is measured. If the definition of success is dependent upon how much power the ruler holds, then it should not come as a shock when Machiavelli’s poster boy for success is someone as ruthless as Cesare Borgia.
In addition to sacrificing virtue, a ruler must be able to discern which vices can be used in order to be successful according to Machiavelli. After listing some virtues and vices, Machiavelli acknowledges that we would call someone who possess all of the virtues worthy of praise (62). He goes on to say that it is impossible for anyone to possess all of the virtues at once. Therefore, according to Machiavelli, a prince should know how to avoid a bad reputation from vices by only practicing the vices that will not take the state from him. The reason I have a problem with this stance is because I do not think that practicing a wrong can put someone in the right. Goodness is achieved by practicing virtues; the opposite of virtue is vice. So the end result of vice is evil, and true evil is not good for anyone.
Contrary to what Machiavelli believes, it is possible for a person in a position of authority to be virtuous and successful. Marcus Aurelius is just one example of a successful ruler who pursued virtue. People of faith in powerful positions will be in a constant battle. Christ says that it is with difficulty that a person of great riches will enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 19:23). The measure of success does depend on the definition of success. In order to be successful to Machiavelli, a ruler must have complete and lasting power no matter the cost; he calls on rulers to abandon moral conduct and the pursuit of virtue for earthly wealth and fame. If no higher power existed, then there would be no basis for an argument based on moral standards. However, we know there is a higher power who defines success for us. “For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?” Matthew 16:26
