Goodbye to Machiavelli

Perhaps I am the only one who still reviews the epoch when slaying one's political opponent, whether through dynastic struggle or hierarchical exploitation, was seen as ethical. Where, an adroit prince would slay his counterparts and stand, as Machiavelli once prescribed, omnipotent over their entire family.

Or maybe I am not?

One thing is certain, the ethical conduct of politicians, unlike the bloodshed of former centuries, has effectively altered in this new political arena.

While ethics have always been integral in reporting political news, whether it is tactfully asking Chelsea Clinton about her father's extramarital relationships or Michelle Obama about her loyalty to America, subtlety and deception seem to be on the rise. It is now more important to confront, rather conspicuously, a politician with their vulgar or misattributed actions, in a public setting.

While I am of the same opinion as Milan Kundera, that private and public life should be separated, it is becoming increasingly difficult to discern the difference. One thing is certain, the furtive maneuvers of both the media and politicians alike have ushered in a new era of ethics. Is it right to, as my journalism professor put it, report that, for instance, "Bob Dole was picking his nose?" Perhaps it is better to leave such characteristics between you and the individual.

In the changing political world, where propaganda is present, either audibly or visibly, one must conceptualize the ramifications of his or her actions. While ethics are inherently the same, the environment in which they are executed and contrivances used to execute them are profoundly different.

Certainly we will miss the days when, in order to gain political superiority, one would simply remove, notice the euphemism, his opponent from power. Instead secret alliances, as Bismarck noticed, are the key to diplomatic and ethical success.

Goodbye Machiavelli.

-JCarmel