What “Machiavellian” really means - Pazit Cahlon and Alex Gendler

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

From Shakespeare’s plays to modern TV dramas,

從莎士比亞的劇作到現代電視劇，

the unscrupulous schemer for whom the ends always justify the means

肆無忌憚的陰謀者總是 用目的來把手段正當化，

has become a familiar character type we love to hate.

這種人已經成為了我們 喜歡去痛恨的熟悉角色。

So familiar, in fact, that for centuries

事實上，實在太熟悉了， 以致於數世紀以來，

we’ve had a single word to describe such characters: Machiavellian.

我們還創造出了一個詞 來描述這類人物：

權謀者（Machiavellian）。

But is it possible that we’ve been using that word wrong this whole time?

但，有沒有可能， 我們一直誤用了這個詞？

The early 16th century statesman Niccoló Machiavelli

十六世紀初，政治家 尼可洛馬基維利

wrote many works of history, philosophy, and drama.

寫了許多關於歷史、 哲學，和戲劇的作品。

But his lasting notoriety comes from a brief political essay known as The Prince,

但讓他的惡名昭彰永垂不朽的， 是一篇簡略的政治短文：

大家所知的《君王論》，

framed as advice to current and future monarchs.

做為對於當下及未來君主的勸告。

Machiavelli wasn’t the first to do this–

馬基維利並不是 第一個這麼做的人——

in fact there was an entire tradition of works known as “mirrors for princes”

事實上，這是一種寫作傳統， 稱為「給君王的借鑒」，

going back to antiquity.

歷史悠久。

But unlike his predecessors,

但，馬基維利和前人的不同之處

Machiavelli didn’t try to describe an ideal government

在於他不會嘗試去描述 一個理想的政府，

or exhort his audience to rule justly and virtuously.

或規勸他的觀眾要以正義、 正直的方式來統治。

Instead, he focused on the question of power–

反之，他把焦點放在 權力的問題上——

how to acquire it, and how to keep it.

如何取得權力，及如何保有權力。

And in the decades after it was published,

《君王論》在出版後數十年，

The Prince gained a diabolical reputation.

得到了很惡毒的名聲。

During the European Wars of Religion,

在歐洲的宗教戰爭時期，

both Catholics and Protestants blamed Machiavelli

天主教徒和新教徒都怪罪馬基維利

for inspiring acts of violence and tyranny committed by their opponents.

鼓勵他們的對手做出 暴力且專橫的行為。

By the end of the century,

到了該世紀末，

Shakespeare was using “Machiavel” to denote an amoral opportunist,

莎士比亞用「馬基維利」這個詞 來代表無道德感的機會主義者，

leading directly to our popular use of “Machiavellian”

也就是我們後來經常 使用的「權謀者」一詞，

as a synonym for manipulative villainy.

它也就變成了 操弄式惡行的同義詞。

At first glance,

乍看之下，

The Prince’s reputation as a manual for tyranny seems well-deserved.

《君王論》理所當然會得到 「暴君手冊」這個名聲。

Throughout, Machiavelli appears entirely unconcerned with morality,

從頭到尾，這部作品顯然 完全沒有任何對道德的在乎，

except insofar as it’s helpful or harmful to maintaining power.

談的就只是道德對於 維持權力的益處和壞處。

For instance, princes are told to consider all the atrocities necessary

比如，它告訴君王要考慮取得權力

所必要的所有殘暴行為，

to seize power,

and to commit them in a single stroke

且要一氣呵成完成這些行為，

to ensure future stability.

以確保未來的穩定。

Attacking neighboring territories and oppressing religious minorities

攻擊鄰近領土 及壓迫宗教上的少數族群

are mentioned as effective ways of occupying the public.

都是佔領大眾的有效方法。

Regarding a prince’s personal behavior,

至於君王的個人行為，

Machiavelli advises keeping up the appearance of virtues

馬基維利建議要保有美善的外表，

such as honesty or generosity,

比如，要看起來誠實或大方，

but being ready to abandon them as soon as one’s interests are threatened.

但要準備好，在自身利益被威脅時 要能立即抛棄這種外表。

Most famously, he notes that for a ruler,

他最著名的說法是， 對統治者而言：

“it is much safer to be feared than loved.”

「被大家害怕，比被大家 愛戴要更安全得多。」

The tract even ends with an appeal to Lorenzo de’ Medici,

那篇短文的結尾 呼籲羅倫佐 · 德 · 麥地奇，

the recently installed ruler of Florence,

當時他是佛羅倫斯 新近就職的統治者，

urging him to unite the fragmented city-states of Italy under his rule.

鼓勵他要在他的統治之下， 將破碎的城市國家給統合起來。

Many have justified Machiavelli as motivated by unsentimental realism

許多人為馬基維利找理由，說 驅使他的是不感情用事的現實主義，

and a desire for peace in an Italy torn by internal and external conflict.

且他渴望因為內外衝突 而破裂的義大利能夠得到和平。

According to this view,

根據這個觀點，

Machiavelli was the first to understand a difficult truth:

馬基維利比大家都早 了解到困難的真相：

the greater good of political stability

為了大我，要讓政治穩定，

is worth whatever unsavory tactics are needed to attain it.

為此目標，任何令人反感的戰略， 只要必要就都值得實行。

The philosopher Isaiah Berlin suggested that rather than being amoral,

哲學家以賽亞伯林指出， 《君王論》並非沒有道德感，

The Prince hearkens back to ancient Greek morality,

它是回頭傾聽了古希臘的道德觀，

placing the glory of the state above the Christian ideal of individual salvation.

把國家的榮耀放在基督教的 理想（個人救贖）之上。

But what we know about Machiavelli might not fit this picture.

但，我們對馬基維利的所知， 並不符合這樣的描述。

The author had served in his native Florence for 14 years as a diplomat,

這位作者在他出生的佛羅倫斯 擔任外交官達十四年之久，

staunchly defending its elected republican government

堅定地保護著該國 被選出的共和黨政府，

against would-be monarchs.

對抗可能成為君王的人。

When the Medici family seized power,

當麥地奇取得權力之後，

he not only lost his position,

他不只失掉了他的職位，

but was even tortured and banished.

甚至在受酷刑虐待後被放逐。

With this in mind,

若考量到這一點，

it’s possible to read the pamphlet he wrote from exile

是有可能不要把他 在流亡時所寫的小冊子

not as a defense of princely rule,

當作保護君主統治的辯護來閱讀，

but a scathing description of how it operates.

而是當作對於君主統治 如何運作所做出的苛刻描寫。

Indeed, Enlightenment figures like Spinoza

的確，啟蒙運動人物， 比如史賓諾沙，

saw it as warning free citizens

就將它視為是在警告自由的公民

of the various ways in which they can be subjugated by aspiring rulers.

有各種方式可以讓他們 被有抱負的統治者給制服。

In fact, both readings might be true.

事實上，兩種解讀都可能是對的。

Machiavelli may have written a manual for tyrannical rulers,

馬基維利可能為暴虐統治者 撰寫了一本手冊，

but by sharing it, he also revealed the cards to those who would be ruled.

但，透過分享這本手冊， 他也向那些被統治的人掀開底牌。

In doing so,

透過這麼做，他在 政治哲學中造成了革命，

he revolutionized political philosophy,

laying the foundations for Hobbes and future thinkers

為霍布斯及未來思想家奠定基礎，

to study human affairs based on their concrete realities

讓他們能夠根據他們 具體的現實來研究人的事務，

rather than preconceived ideals.

而不是根據先入為主的理想。

Through his brutal and shocking honesty,

透過他殘酷且震撼的誠實，

Machiavelli sought to shatter popular delusions about what power really entails.

馬基維利希望能粉碎大眾的幻覺， 看清權力需要承擔的是什麼。

And as he wrote to a friend shortly before his death,

正如他在死前不久寫給朋友的信，

he hoped that people would “learn the way to Hell in order to flee from it."

他希望大家能「了解通往地獄的路，

才能夠從這條路上逃脫。」