I was thoroughly glad to see the era of George W. Bush come to an end. He had, I believed, become a terrible liability for America–in both foreign and domestic policy.
In foreign affairs, America had become entrapped in a totally needless war in Iraq. And by authorizing the use of torture, he had turned the United States into a pariah nation in the eyes of much of the civilized world.
Domestically, he had allowed the sheer greed and arrogance of America’s most powerful corporations to push the nation to the brink of bankruptcy.
So during the early weeks of President Barack Obama’s first term, I sent him a gift: My favorite selections from the two major works of Niccolo Machiavelli: The Prince and The Discourses.
Niccolo Machiavelli
I hoped that, on at least some occasions, the new President would find useful advice in the wisdom of the father of political science.
Unfortunately, such has not been the case.
For example:
United Nations officials estimate that more than 6,000 people have died in Syria since fighting erupted in 2011 against the regime of dictator Bashir al-Assad.
During that time, the world made no move to intervene–for a series of excellent reasons. Among these:
- Since 1979, Syria has been listed by the U.S. State Department as a sponsor of terrorism.
- There are no “good Syrians” for the United States to support. There is a civil war between rival terrorist groups.
- Among these: Hezbollah and Hamas (pro-Assad); and Al Qaeda (anti-Assad).
This was the position of the United States as well.
Meanwhile, President Obama said on several occasions that if Assad used chemical weapons against his enemies, that would be “a red line in the sand.”
Then, on August 21, the Assad regime was accused of using chemical weapons in Damascus suburbs to kill more than 1,400 civilians.
On August 30, the Obama administration said it had “high confidence” that Syria’s government carried out the chemical weapons attack.
Having boxed himself in, Obama felt he had to make good on his threat–even if it risked the lives of those flying combat missions over Syria’s formidable air defenses.
He sent Secretary of State John Kerry before TV cameras to express America’s moral outrage at Syria’s use of chemical weapons.
And he positioned six American warships close to the Syrian coast.
On August 31, Obama announced that he would seek Congressional authorization before attacking Syria. Obama said he was “prepared to give that order” to strike Syria because:
- Syria’s use of chemical weapons “risks making a mockery of the global prohibition on the use of chemicals weapons,” and
- It put U.S. regional allies that share a border with Syria in danger.
It looked as though the United States was about to plunge into its third Middle East war in 12 years.
Then Russian President Vladimir Putin offered his own suggestion for averting war: Syria would agree to put its stocks of chemical weapons under United Nations control.
On September 14, the United States and Russia announced in Geneva that they reached a deal that provided a path for Obama to avoid the air strikes he had promised to launch against Syria.
Suddenly, Obama asked congressional leaders to delay votes on authorizing military action in Syria while the diplomatic process worked itself out.
As “Tonight” show host Jay Leno put it: Obama gave a speech calling for war–and then the rebuttal.
So what does Niccolo Machiavelli have to do with any of this?
In Chapter 19 of The Prince, his guide to successful rulership, he outlines “That We Must Avoid Being Despised and Hated.”
“The prince must…avoid those things which will make him hated or despised. And whenever he succeeds in this, he will have done his part, and will find no danger in other vices….
“He is rendered despicable by being thought changeable, frivolous, effeminate, timid and irresolute—which a prince must guard against as a rock of danger….
“[He] must contrive that his actions show grandeur, spirit, gravity and fortitude. As to the government of his subjects, let his sentence be irrevocable, and let him adhere to his decisions so that no one may think of deceiving or cozening him.”
By making a vigorous case for going to war with Syria, and then suddenly reversing himself, Obama has managed to offend everyone:
- Right-wingers–who hoped to see America plunge into another Middle East war.
- Liberals–who didn’t want to repeat the 2003 Iraqi war disaster.
- Syrian rebels–who expected a full-scale American intervention to bring them to power.
- The Assad regime–which no doubt believes Obama was bluffing.
Unfortunately, history is not a VHS tape that can be rewound. No one–including Obama–gets a second chance to make a first impression.
By repeatedly showing timidity toward Republicans, Obama had forfeited credibility as a leader to be feared by his domestic Right-wing enemies.
President Theodore Roosevelt famously said: “I have always lived by a South African proverb: Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.”
By speaking loudly and then putting his big stick aside, Obama forfeited credibility among his foreign enemies.

ABC NEWS, ALEX JONES, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CIVIL WAR, CLIVEN BUNDY, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUFFINGTON POST, MEDIA MATTERS, MILITIA GROUPS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEVADA, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SWAT TEAMS, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE DISCOURSES, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE PRINCE, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, ULYSSES S. GRANT, UPI, WILLIAM T. SHERMAN
THE DANGERS OF TIMIDITY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on April 23, 2014 at 1:00 amPresident Barack Obama–or at least Neil Kornze, the director of the Federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM)–has some serious lessons to learn about the uses of power.
For more than 20 years, Cliven Bundy, a Nevada cattle rancher, has refused to pay fees for grazing cattle on public lands, some 80 miles north of Las Vegas.
BLM says Bundy now owes close to $1 million. He says his family has used the land since the 1870s and doesn’t recognize the federal government’s jurisdiction.
In 2013, a federal judge ordered Bundy to remove his livestock. He ignored the order, and in early April, 2014, BLM agents rounded up more than 400 of his cattle.
Over the weekend of April 12-13, armed militia members and states’ right protesters showed up to challenge the move.
Bureau of Land Management logo
Rather than risk violence, the BLM did an about-face and released the cattle.
Right-wing bloggers and commentators have portrayed the incident as a victory over Federal tyranny.
According to Alex Jones’ Infowars.com: “Historic! Feds Forced to Surrender to American Citizens.”
Right-wingers have depicted Bundy as a put-upon Everyman being “squeeaed” by the dictatorial Federal government.
They have deliberately ignored a number of inconvenient truths–such as:
Bundy’s family and other ranchers–backed up by a motley assortment of self-declared militiamen armed with rifles and pistols–confronted the agents.
Fearing another Waco–regarded by Right-wing Americans as a second Alamo–the BLM agents backed down and released Bundy’s cattle. And then retreated.
While Right-wingers hail this as a victory for “states’ rights,” the truth is considerably different.
Bundy’s refusal to recognize the federal government’s jurisdiction amounts to: “I will recognize–and obey–only those laws that I happen to agree with.”
And the BLM’s performance offers a texbook lesson on how not to promote respect for the law–or for those who enforce it.
As Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of modern political science warned more than 500 years ago in The Prince:
[A ruler] is rendered despicable by being thought changeable, frivolous, effeminate, timid and irresolute—which [he] must guard against as a rock of danger….
[He] must contrive that his actions show grandeur, spirit, gravity and fortitude.
As to the government of his subjects, let his sentence be irrevocable, and let him adhere to his decisions so that no one may think of deceiving or cozening him.
Niccolo Machiavelli
In his master-work, The Discouorses, he outlines the consequences of allowing lawbreakers to go unpunished:
...Having established rewards for good actions and penalties for evil ones, and having rewarded a citizen for conduct who afterwards commits a wrong, he should be chastised for that without regard to his previous merits….
For if a citizen who has rendered some eminent service to the state should add to the reputation and influence which he has thereby acquired the confident audacity of being able to commit any wrong without fear of punishment, he will in a little while become so insolent and overbearing as to put an end to all power of the law.
The conduct of the agents of BLM has violated that sage counsel on all counts.
BLM agents should have expected trouble from Right-wing militia groups–and come fully prepared to deal with it.
The FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service, for example, have created SWAT teams to deal with those who threaten violence against the Federal Government.
Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman had a formula for dealing with domestic terrorists of his own time.
Writing to his commander, Ulysses S. Grant, about the best way to treat Confederate guerrillas, he advised:
General Willilam Tecumseh Sherman
“They cannot be made to love us, but they may be made to fear us. We cannot change the hearts of those people of the South.
“But we can make war so terrible that they will realize the fact that . . . they are still mortal and should exhaust all peaceful remedies before they fly to war.”
Share this: