“The man who builds a factory,” said President Calvin Coolidge, “builds a temple. And the man who works there worships there.”
Many American corporate executives still feel about themselves–nd their employees. But those heady days of knee-jerk worship of CEOs and their oversize salaries and egos are over–at least, temporarily.
Americans have reluctantly learned that the robber barons who rule Wall Street arenot God’s own elect.
Even Ayn Rand disciple Allen Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman and a longtime champion of de-regulation, has admitted he totally underestimated the role greed plays in the making of financial decisions.
It’s thus time for Americans to demand wholesale reforms in the ways corporate executives are allowed to operate. And a good place to start is with the advice of Niccolo Machiavelli.
The Florentine statesman (1469-1527) wrote extensively about how bureaucracies truly work–as opposed to how people believe they do.
Niccolo Machiavelli
Consider the following from his book, The Prince, which offers instruction on how to attain and retain power:
- IMITATE THOSE WHO HAVE ATTAINED GREATNESS: Not always being able to follow others exactly, nor attain to the excellence of those he imitates, a prudent man should always follow in the paths trodden by great men and imitate those who are most excellent…. If he does not attain to their greatness, at any rate he will get some tinge of it.
- DON’T RELY ON LOVE: …I conclude, therefore, with regard to being loved and feared, that men love at their own free will, but fear at the will of the prince, and that a wise prince must rely on what is in his power and not on what is in the power of others, and he must only contrive to avoid incurring hatred….
- NEED TO BE PRACTICAL: A man who wishes to make a profession of goodness in everything must inevitably come to grief among so many who are not good. And therefore it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself, to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge and not use it, according to the necessity of the case.
- CAUTION AND BOLDNESS: A [leader]…must imitate the fox and the lion, for the lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to avoid traps, and a lion to frighten wolves. Those who wish to be only lions do not realize this.
- SANCTIONS VS. FAVORS: [Leaders] should let the carrying out of unfavorable duties devolve to others, and bestow favors themselves.
- RISK AS A GIVEN: Let no [leader] believe that [he] can always follow a safe policy, rather let [he] think that all are doubtful. This is found in the nature of things, that one never tries to avoid one difficulty without running into another, but prudence consists in being able to know the nature of the difficulties, and taking the least harmful as good.
- A RULER’S SUBORDINATES: The first impression that one gets of a ruler and his brains is from seeing the men that he has about him. When they are competent and loyal one can always consider him wise, as he has been able to recognize their ability and keep them faithful.
- But when they are the reverse, one can always form an unfavorable opinion of him, because the first mistake that he makes is in making this choice.
- EVALUATING COMPETENCE: There are three different kinds of brains: the one understands things unassisted, the other understands things when shown by others, the third understands neither alone nor with the explanations of others. The first kind is most excellent; the second is also excellent; but the third is useless.
- OVERCOMING ONE’S OWN NATURE: No man can be found so prudent as to be able to adopt himself to [time and circumstances], either because he cannot deviate from that to which his nature disposes him.
- Or else because having always prospered by walking in one path, he cannot persuade himself that it is well to leave it; and therefore the cautious man, when it is time to act suddenly, does not know how to do so and is consequently ruined. For if one could change one’s nature with time and circumstances, fortune would never change.
- ENSURING LOYALTY: A wise prince will seek means by which his subjects will always have need of his government, and then they will always be faithful to him.
- CRUELTIES: Well-committed may be called those…cruelties which are perpetrated once for the need of securing one’s self, and which afterward are not persisted in, but are exchanged for measures as useful to the subjects as possible. Cruelties ill committed are those which, although at first few, increase rather than diminish with time.
- FORTUNE: I think it may be true that fortune is the ruler of half our actions, but that she allows the other half or thereabouts to be governed by us.
- I would compare her to an impetuous river that, when turbulent, inundates the plains, casts down trees and buildings, removes earth from this side and places it on the other; every one flees before it, and everything yields to its fury without being able to oppose it. Still, when it is quiet, men can make provisions against it by dykes and banks, so that when it follows it will either go into a canal or its rush will not be so wild and dangerous.
ABC NEWS, AL CAPONE, CBS NEWS, CENSORSHIP, CNN, ELIOT NESS, ELLIS ACT, EVICTIONS, FACEBOOK, HARRISON E. SALISBURY, LANDLORDS, NBC NEWS, SAN FRANCISCO, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE UNTOUCHABLES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THE WINDERMERE CAY APARTMENTS, TWITTER, USA TODAY, YELP!
LANDLORDS: AMERICA’S AYATOLLAHS: PART TWO (END)
In Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on March 12, 2015 at 1:11 amBecome a tenant at the Windermere Cay complex in Winter Garden, Florida, and you can check your First Amendment rights at the door.
Its management wants to force new tenants to sign a “social media addendum” as part of their lease. And if they dare to post a negative online review of the building, they’ll face a fine of $10,000.
But reaction to this attempted muzzling of freedom of speech has been one the landlord probably didn’t expect.
Yelp! has been flooded with negative reviews of the complex.
Among these:
If you are that worried about negative reviews, that just makes me ask one question: What are you hiding?
* * * * *
This complex made national news by threatening a $10k fine to residents if they share a bad review or photo. This legal bullying demonstrates either an oppressive management or a complete ignorance of social media or personal freedom.
In both cases you should exercise caution if considering them and read your contracts carefully.
* * * * *
I’ve got a great business idea. When our customers complain, instead of us fixing the problem we will threaten them with blackmail by asking them for ten grand.
* * * * *
Sieg Heil Windermere!! Gestapo much???
What century do you people exist in?? I wouldn’t live here if you paid me to. You couldn’t give these units away considering your BS threats to FINE RESIDENTS TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!
WTF is wrong with you people!! Anyone who gets a paycheck from this corporate monstrosity should be fired (or quit if they have half a brain…). Whoever came up with this super clever idea of A 10K FINE should be kneecapped.
* * * * *
Well apparently anyone who lives here will get fined $10,000 for any bad reviews, and any photos posted on reviews are copyrighted to the company by terms of the lease???
This complex is about as dishonest as it gets guys. If an apartment needs a policy like this then what else do you need to know about the quality of the management here.
* * * * *
The owners of the Apartment Complex are literally anti-free speech Nazis. Don’t move here unless you have $10k in your bank account and don’t believe in the First Amendment.
* * * * *
This apartment complex deserves 0 stars, shame on the management company for deceiving people into signing their addendum.
* * * * *
Be cautious of anywhere that fears the residents’ honest feedback so much that they forbid them from speaking out on social media. The energy spent on creating this stupid 10K clause could have been spent on actually creating an enjoyable living experience.
Click here: Windermere Cay – Apartments – Yelp
The sudden onslaught of bad publicity obviously caught the complex by surprise.
When contacted by Ars Technica, the online magazine that had exposed this outrage, a manager disclaimed the contract:
“This addendum was put in place by a previous general partner for the community following a series of false reviews. The current general partner and property management do not support the continued use of this addendum and have voided it for all residents.”
This despite the fact that the addendum had been given to a tenant to sign just a few days before.
Not only have these strong-arm tactics yielded a tidal wave of bad publicity, such an addendum would be legally unenforceable.
For starters, it’s a blatant violation of the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech and the press.
States have taken struck down efforts by businesses to censor the written opinions of their customers.
In his 2003 decision in New York vs. Network Associates, a judge ruled that telling customers they couldn’t publish reviews of software “without prior consent” violated New York’s unfair competition law.
Americans all-too-often take their Constitutionally-protected freedoms for granted–until they travel abroad to nations ruled by dictators. Or until they encounter would-be dictators at home.
Harrison E. Salisbury, the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, faced the difficulties of censorship during his years as Moscow bureau chief for The New York Times (1949-1954).
Harrison E. Salisbury, with the Kremlin in back
Salisbury found he couldn’t rely on the Soviet government for reliable information on almost everything. Crime statistics weren’t published–because, officially, there was no crime in the “Workers’ Paradise.”
Unable to obtain reliable economic statistics, he plotted the rise and fall of the economy by shortages and surpluses in local stores.
Above all, Salisbury faced the danger of reporting accurately on the increasing paranoia and purges of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
“The truth, I was ultimately to learn,” wrote Salisbury in his bestselling 1983 memoir, A Journey for Our Times, “is the most dangerous thing. There are no ends to which men of power will not go to put out its eyes.”
Censorship victimizes both those who are censored and those who could profit from the truths they have to share.
Americans may be unable to bring freedom of expression to nations ruled by dictators. But they can–and should–fight to ensure that freedom of expression remains a hallmark of their own society.
Share this: