Opere di Niccolò Machiavelli :

Imprint reads "Italia" beneath a medallion containing the initials "L. C."

Opere di Niccolò Machiavelli cittadino e segretario fiorentino.

Prepared under the direction of Francesco Tassi; the preface is that by Tanzini of the 1782 and 1796 Florence editions (updated and modernized). See Bertelli & Innocenti, p. cxlv-cxlvi; G. Procacci, Studi sulla fortuna del Machiavelli, p. 401 n.

Biografi e critici del Machiavelli : saggi /

Includes bibliographical references.

Niccolò Machiavelli e i suoi tempi, illustrati con nuovi documenti.

Mode of access: Internet.

Oeuvres complètes de N. Machiavelli /

Translated from the Italian of his Opere.

Niccolò Machiavelli e i suoi tempi,

Mode of access: Internet.

Montesquieu e Machiavelli /

Mode of access: Internet.

Reason of state and a new notion of fortune : Historicising the risk society

Since the 1980s the concept of risk has produced a large and diverse volume of sociological research. Ulrich Beck’s groundbreaking risk society thesis provides a particularly engaging contribution, since it seems that nearly every sociological account of risk engages with this work. For Beck, we are living in second modernity – a new epoch that breaks with pre-modernity and industrial society due to the centrality, incalculability and reflexivity of globalised risk. While Beck’s theory is compelling, a reading of other theorists such as Foucault (2007[1978]) and Hacking (1975,1990) suggests that a difficulty with Beck’s work is that in attempting to explain what is novel about risk in contemporary times, he too quickly passes over the complexities and ruptures of historical change that impact on the history and contingency of risk. This paper begins by presenting a brief analysis of the present state of risk by introducing Beck’s historical narrative of risk from pre-modernity to the risk society; it then outlines the challenges with the “risk as epoch” argument by considering a range of literature, which suggests risk has a more complex history than proposed by Beck; and finally it highlights the value in examining strategies of statecraft in early modern Europe, specifically Machiavelli’s The Prince (2008[1513]) and Giovanni Botero’s political treatise, Della Ragion di Stato (1956[1589]) – as a means of more thoroughly understanding how our current concept of risk emerges. In doing so, this paper seeks to open up new trajectories in the historicisation of risk for other interested scholars.

La política en la actualidad : ¿más cerca de la virtud o del vicio?

Resumen: En este artículo se expone en forma sucinta dos formas muy diferentes de concebir la política, a saber: la de algunos autores denominados clásicos, cuyos principales representantes son Platón, Aristóteles, Cicerón y Tomás de Aquino, y la forma moderna representada por Maquiavelo. Los primeros, salvando algunas diferencias, entienden la política como un saber moral práctico, como una noble actividad que debe ser ejercida por los mejores en vistas al bien de todos. Maquiavelo, por su parte, la entiende como una técnica, totalmente desarraigada de la moral, cuyo fin es obtener, mantener y acrecentar el poder. Al parecer, y es lo que se intentará demostrar en la exposición, hay indicios suficientes para afirmar que el maquiavelismo se ha «impuesto» a los clásicos. La perspectiva desde la cual se abordara esta pregunta, es la del Magisterio reciente de la Iglesia Católica

La compañía de los sofistas : Maquiavelo, objetor de Althusser

Resumen: El estudio de Maquiavelo fue recurrente en Louis Althusser. Maquiavelo le permitía repensar la acción política, sin que eso supusiera la existencia a priori de un sujeto a quién la teoría le reconociera axiomáticamente la capacidad de llevar a cabo esa acción. Este artículo ofrece un análisis de la conferencia dictada por Althusser en el Instituto de Ciencias Políticas de París, en 1977, en la que no sólo propone esta lectura del florentino, sino una concepción no acumulativa de historia, que posibilita una apropiación diferenciada de la antigüedad.

Uma investigação sobre a forma de governo e o modo de governar da República

Esta dissertação procura, utilizando o pensamento de Maquiavel, Montesquieu e Madison, estudar o governo republicano a partir de dois paradigmas distintos, a saber, a forma de governo e o modo de governar. O primeiro diz respeito ao seu caráter institucional do Estado e da atividade política e se torna inteligível por uma compreensão teórica da política, ou seja, sobre o que lhe confere formato. O segundo se refere aos modos de ação do governo independentemente de seu formato institucional e pode ser compreendido por aspectos sociológicos, pois diz respeito mais à sociedade. Maquiavel e, de um ponto de vista, Montesquieu podem ser considerados os principais representantes da tradição que identifica na forma de governo a definição da república. Montesquieu, sob outra perspectiva, e Madison são os que mais se dedicaram ao modo de governar. Além disso, este estudo procura abordar a liberdade como categoria identitária da política e, assim, formando um todo coeso da tradição republicana.

Introduction: the impact of the 'War on Terror' on executive–legislative relations: a global perspective

In democratic polities, constitutional equilibria or balances of power between the executive and the legislature shift over time. Normative and empirical political theorists have long recognised that war, civil unrest, economic and political crises, terrorist attacks, and other events strengthen the power of the executive, disrupt and threaten constitutional politics, and damage democratic institutions: crises require swift action and executives are thought to be more capable than parliaments and legislatures of taking such actions. The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on 11 September 2001 and the ensuing so-called 'war on terror' declared by President Bush clearly constituted a crisis, not only in the United States but also in other political systems, in part because of the US's hegemonic position in defining and shaping many other states' foreign and domestic policies. Dicey, Schmitt, and Rossiter suggest that critical events and political crises inevitably trigger the concentration of (emergency) powers in the hands of the executive. Aristotle and Machiavelli questioned the inevitability of this process. This article and the articles that follow in this Special Issue utilise empirical evidence, through the use of case studies of the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, Australia, Israel, Italy and Indonesia, to address this debate. Specifically, the issue explores to what extent the external shock or crisis of 9/11 (and other terrorist attacks) and the ensuing 'war on terror' significantly changed the balance of executive-legislative relations from t (before the crisis) to t+1 (after the crisis) in these political systems, all of which were the targets of actual or foiled terrorist attacks. The most significant findings are that the shock of 9/11 and the 'war on terror' elicited varied responses by national executives and legislatures/parliaments and thus the balance of executive-legislative relations in different political systems; that, therefore, executive-legislative relations are positive rather than zero-sum; and that domestic political contexts conditioned these institutional responses.

Machiavelli’s Walls: The Legacy of Realism in International Relations Theory

In this paper we argue that Niccolò Machiavelli has little to do with Realism in International Relations theory. By concentrating, as Machaivelli did, on the walls that define political relations—both inside and outside the polity—we find his insights deeply rooted in the specific political contexts of Sixteenth century Italy. Others may wish to generalize from them, but Machiavelli did not. In fact, as we show, Machiavelli was mindful of the difficulties of generalizing about walls and acknowledged the dangers political actors faced in navigating between the internal and external walls of the polity. We examine the geopolitical contours of Machiavelli’s walls and seek to demonstrate how morality is present in these historical spaces. In contrast to Realists, Machiavelli was ready and willing to make ethical judgments. We argue that theorists of international politics should exercise care in reaching for Machiavelli as the iconic thinker for making sense of anarchy in world politics. This article concludes by suggesting that the ideology of Machiavellianism has obscured deeper understanding of the particular contexts of Machiavelli’s own world.