Machiavelli was born in 1469 in Florence, Italy, and was educated in mathematics, music, logic, and philosophy. He was lead by Plato and Polybius’s work to develop a concept of the basic forms of government that may exist. The common view of political science sees monarchy, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy, and license as six distinct regime types, but Machiavelli was more impressed with an idea of dividing them into three groups according to the rule of the one, the few, and the many. He settled the issue by stating that each form has an evil twin, a corrupt version of the positive regime. Machiavelli took this idea further by merging the regimes into one cycle of interchangeable forms of government. “The first king is a strong warrior, his successors rule by wisdom and justice more than might and valor perfects it. Heredity turns it into tyranny. Tyranny provokes a revolt by nobles who form an aristocracy. Heredity makes corruption and leads to oligarchy. Revolt of people leads to democracy. Freedom leads to license. A strong man takes control” (Coby 24).
It can be inferred from Machiavelli’s view of the cyclical regimes that change benefits regimes and that they become corrupt unless changed. Each regime begins as a positive form of government, in which the rulers are trying to achieve greatness through reform for their state, but as time goes by the transfer of power, especially through heredity, creates rulers that remember not the former state and become corrupt, causing a revolt by the displeased masses. When power is taken from a ruling class that has gone astray, the new class in charge attempts to avoid repeating the mistakes of the former regime, but after a while the past is forgotten and corruption sets in. “…Machiavelli’s discussion of regimes, dependent on Polybius, is silent about the relative merits of kingship, aristocracy, and democracy. Accordingly, movement through the cycle cannot truly be portrayed as decline…the movement is more like the ups and downs of a roller coaster proceeding along a circular track…”(Coby 24).
Although change refreshes regimes, it may prove disastrous for domestic stability; it being the source of national power, troubled internal harmony may weaken the state and invite attack form neighboring states. “Why treat the cycle as a process from which the city must escape? Machiavelli’s answer… the domestic instability invites a take over from without…preservation requires stopping the cycle…a feat which no simple regime can accomplish, but which a mixed regime can, either “at a stroke”, or as Machiavelli says of Rome, by traveling the “right way” to perfection” (Coby 24). Machiavelli explained the force that powers the regimes through the cycle by describing how in each regime, one part in the state holds all the power; this leads to abuse of power and to corruption. He prescribes a mixed regime in which power is divided onto several classes, which keep each other in check. Assuming that democracy is based, to some extent on the liberty of the people, it should be the goal of the people to insure that no class gets control of all the power. “The mixed regime is an alliance of princely, aristocratic, and popular elements which, because each element “watches” the others, forestalls the decline to which simple regimes are prone. Total power corrupts, Machiavelli concedes, at least over time and when removed from the memory of its origins; and particularly invidious is the hereditary transmission of power. Shared power, on the other hand, either prevents corruption or protects against the effects of corruption”(Coby 24).“A constitution orders the particular distribution of power- a senate for the nobles, a tribunate for the plebs. In a simple regime all power is concentrated; in a mixed regime power is divided between the classes. Because it is divided, it cannot so easily be abused; and protection from the abuse of power is the meaning of liberty”(Coby 36).
Machiavelli derives the necessity of a mixed regime as a result of his extremely cynical, or perhaps realistic evaluation of the nature of man. “…the people can become good by subordinating their personal ambitions to the well-being of the group. Necessity is what makes them good, whereas choice, or the freedom to act on their malignant impulses, is what makes them bad”(Coby 29). He believes that the state should limit the classes’ ability to gain power because it corrupts them. When trying to promote social cohesion, laws for protecting against the vices of men become even more important.
“The people’s goodness is not a unified disposition but consists of pairs of contrasting qualities (trust-distrust, gratitude-ingratitude, submissiveness-rebelliousness, etc.), one set for use with friends and supporters the other for use with adversaries and enemies. As the community contracts and more opponents than comrades are encountered, the law must adjust to reflect the suspicious and assertive side of the people’s goodness”(Coby 14).
