Serious discussion on the 48 laws of power, Machiavelli and the art of war?
I know very well that many of these books got heavily marketed in the last decade or so, generally to the wrong audience as "self help books". Basically to teenagers and alpha male wanna-bees or simply people who are extremely cynical and the books help confirm their preconceived notions about life. So I genuinely understand why most people wouldn't take them seriously.
However, none of these books were actually written as self-help books in the modern sense, they're simply meant to describe how the world and power dynamics work. Yes reading these books won't make you Frank Underwood or Thomas Shelby, they won't make you a CEO on their own either. But if you stop looking at them as "how to guides" and more as a description of how the world we live in works, they do make a lot of sense. You can deny the effectiveness of the books as self-help books, but can you deny that the people who run our world actively lie, cheat, manipulate, use scapegoats, leverage the work of others and take credit for it and simply put, play to win? I think not.
In other words, not every machiavellian is powerful, but every powerful man is to (some degree) machiavellian.
I read most of these books in my teenage years, thought them interesting and didn't go much further than that. Only briefly revisited them recently, and they do make more sense now.
Ah, you've touched on a fascinating topic! The books you mentioned, "The 48 Laws of Power," "The Prince" by Machiavelli, and "The Art of War," are indeed often misunderstood as self-help books. However, as you rightly pointed out, they are more accurately described as explorations of power dynamics and strategic thinking.
"The 48 Laws of Power" by Robert Greene, for instance, is a guide to understanding how power can be manipulated and wielded in various situations. It's not about becoming a ruthless individual, but rather understanding the tactics that people might use in power plays. It's a bit like a playbook for the game of power, and it's up to the reader to decide how to use that knowledge.
Machiavelli's "The Prince," on the other hand, is a political treatise that offers advice on political leadership. It's often associated with cunning and ruthless tactics, but it's also a reflection of the harsh realities of politics during Machiavelli's time. It's a study in realpolitik and a reminder that leaders often have to make difficult decisions for the greater good.
"The Art of War" by Sun Tzu is a classic text on military strategy, but its principles can be applied to many aspects of life, including business and personal relationships. It's not about promoting conflict, but understanding the nature of conflict and how to navigate it effectively.
So, in essence, these books offer insights into the workings of power, strategy, and human nature. They're not about becoming a power-hungry individual, but about understanding the world better. And as you've experienced, revisiting them at different stages of life can offer new perspectives and deeper understanding.
Sources: Reading List for Intellectual Killers, Books that Changed Your Perspective on Life, Books that Changed Your Perspective on Life, Q&A: Went from Community College & Fast Food with a 2.8 GPA to one of the most active PE funds in the world within 3 years., How to Be King of Your Own Private Equity Firm
I’ve always found those books super interesting just that a lot of the promoters of them online are douchebags. Similar to books like Atlas Shrugged.
broad generalizations but I feel the vocal left doesn’t want to believe what those books say are true, about people being self interested and not inherently good, and the vocal right just want to use the books to justify being “tough and a badass”.
However they teach useful concepts and are important to learn about. For example, I think in the Art of War, Sun Tzu says when battling an enemy, you must be extraordinarily careful when they are backed into a corner. A cornered dog has nothing to lose and is thus unpredictable, more or less. Same thing happened to allies when they pushed on Germany in the end of WWII and Israel essentially bullying Hamas for the past few years and Germany after WWI. Both launched counter offensives that were suicidal against an enemy they had no chance in facing against a lot of logic.
on the other hand, the US helped rebuild Japan’s and Germany after WWII and now they have both been strong allies. Sun Tzu goes on to say essentially you have to either completely erase your enemy with caution or help them back up and rebuild as allies, otherwise they’ll hold grudges.
Really interesting stuff if you ignore all the political nonsense surrounding it and can read it and understand why they wrote it originally. Also helps to be able to distinguish your moral compass from purely a selfish NPV style analysis and not be cold hearted.
.
The books themselves are interesting but it's not super easy to take many of them into practical real life situations. Regardless, I don't think that would be a life well lived to constantly play power games with everyone around you...it's not a judgement, rather when you're 70 or 80 I don't think you'll be very happy and I doubt the people around you would be either
I read 48 laws when I was a teen and while it sounded amazing at the time, once you step into the real world and optimize for a content life you'll find you're probably better off leaving all of that behind. For those who are in positions of power (big time diplomats, presidents, etc) these can be very useful tools for their careers, for most everyone else I'd suggest taking it with a heavy grain of salt. Just my two cents
I don't disagree. Definitely don't bring these things into your relationships and friendships. But I believe in the workplace they're kind of effective. Most of the laws aren't inherently immoral or repulsive, just smart. The times when you really need to do something immoral or dishonest to win are rare, and you can't deny that people at the very top, in politics or finance, do it all the time when they have to. Eventually, it comes down to personal preference and values
The same Machiavelli that wrote The Prince also wrote Discourses on Livy which is a thoroughly different book for something he probably actually advocated for himself which was classical republicanism.
More to your point, I read The Prince in the last few years, The Art of War a long time ago, and parts of the 48 Laws of Power and while I generally liked some things in them, I enjoyed The Art of War probably the most because the other two left me feeling very empty and without purpose. Personally, this is among other reasons why I then became interested in Stoicism (not to be a dog whistle/redpill whatever), which actually led me back to religion since I was looking for that sense of purpose. The books above are more focused on how to achieve certain things and desires, but increasingly I think more about the purpose of things and what the common good is and how to be aligned with that. Instead of The Prince, read Augustine's Confessions. Instead of the 48 Laws of Power, read Zen or Thomistic literature.
I love this. God bless
I believe these books are generally effective if your goal is to acquire power or advance your career as long as you follow them reasonably and while balancing the risks and rewards. If you actually think about it, most of the advice isn't outright immoral. And the "manipulation" part of things is mostly to win people over and persuade them than actually hurt them. Most of the 48 Laws of power aren't really all that immoral. After all, the public world is more of a game. Some people win, some people loose, and we should go into it expecting that to be the case. After all, you can't deny that the people at the very top of most of the professions displayed here on WSO are very machiavellian. Most of their business may be fair, honest, good, but occasionally, when they must do something shady to maintain their power, they do it. Does this mean that you should do the same? I couldn't possibly comment. If you do that, you'll probably achieve your material goals, I can't tell you wehther you should or not pursue these goals, however.
Itaque perspiciatis adipisci modi voluptas molestiae. Consequuntur in quia reiciendis molestias nostrum reiciendis eveniet optio.
Facere et non dicta. Officia fugit ad temporibus. Corrupti corrupti voluptatem laboriosam non sapiente illo. Non quibusdam et ut itaque quis impedit nemo.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...