Machiavelli and Thoreau

In the world, people have different views about each other all the time. Some say that people are lazy; some say people are compliant, and others say people are safe. Henry David Thoreau and Niccolo Machiavelli also have two different views on the masses. In “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli seem to be passionate about their point of view on government, but they also seem to have two different distinct views on the masses of the people.

            A person who’s focused on major change is worried about the “masses.” This is because most of the time majority rules, and that’s how things get done. However, to gain support a person has to appeal to the masses, and this is done by understanding the majority. This is exactly what Machiavelli and Thoreau did when they were talking about their ideologies. They both made generalizations about the people, and both of their generalizations seem to be correct, despite the fact that they were different. I say that they both seem to be correct because they inspired people who changed the course of history. Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” inspired Ghandi, Mandela, and Martin Luther King Jr. But Napolean, Mussolini, and Hitler seemed to be inspired by Machiavelli’s The Prince. These people had major impacts on the world, and to be successful they had to take the generalizations about the masses that were made by Machiavelli and Thoreau and apply it to their purpose.

            Even though both of their generalizations seem to be correct, they were completely different. Thoreau and Machiavelli both had strong opinions about the masses that either worked against the majority or worked in favor of the majority. Thoreau believed that the masses could be a strong and influential force. He didn’t explicitly say this; however, it was implied because he believed that if a person were to put their whole life into a cause there could possibly be a change. Whereas Machiavelli believed that the masses had no power because he saw them as feeble and weak. He felt that the masses take everything for face value and that’s one of the reasons why a tyrant can hold their position.

            I don’t know how true these ideas about the masses are, but I do know that they’re true to a certain extent. Everyone is different and everyone has a different way of thinking. However, if these ideas on the masses aren’t correct they wouldn’t have worked in favor of the major figures in history so well.