Three Political Philosophers (Machiavelli, Montesquieu, and Burke)

(Analysis)

ü  Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527)

o   He was a diplomat, political philosopher, playwright, and civil servant of the Florentine Republic. He also write comedies, carnival songs, poetry, and some of the best-known personal correspondence in the Italian language.     

ü  Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755)

o   He was a French political thinker. He lived during the Enlightenment, and is famous for his theory of the separation of powers in government. Many constitutions all over the world use it. He helped make the terms "feudalism" and "Byzantine Empire" popular.   

ü  Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

o   He was an important Irish politician, and writer. He became a member of the British Parliament in 1765. Burke supported the American Revolution but made attacks against the French Revolution. His most famous book was Reflections on the Revolution in France, which created many of the ideas in conservatism. 

Questions:

a)      Which of the Three Political Philosophers do you find more appealing and less appealing? Why?

o     For me, the most appealing Political Philosopher is Montesquieu because I like the way he divided Politics. First of all, he established the three major forms of government : Republic, Monarchy, and Despotism. In the same way, I consider really important The Separation of Powers, having the Legislative Branch (makes the laws), Executive Branch (carries out the laws and the government programs), and Judicial Branch (judges the constitutionality of the laws) in a democracy, which is the current form of government that its used in Mexico. In sum, I prefer to have an organized type of government, where power concentrates in the people, not only in one person, such a Monarchy. For that reason, I find really interesting and attractive Montesquieu's ideas.

o  However, I don't disagree completely with any of these philosophers (Machiavelli, Montesquieu, and Burke), I just have some differences with Machiavelli's ideas. For example, I don't agree with the use of force in politics because this could led to internal and external conflicts; moreover, the best example of this, is what happened in 1968, in Mexico City, where thousands of students were killed by the abuse of power from the government (Political Party during that period of time = PRI).   

b)      Which of the Three Political Philosophers do you think are more and less realistic about "human nature", and about what can be expected from people, societies, and governments? I consider Burke's ideas, as the most realistic (out of the Three Political Philosophers) about human nature because  (referring to politics) the concept that an elected representative must use his own judgement in deciding how to vote on issues; for that reason, the "Burkean Representation" is now almost universally accepted as the proper attitude toward representation in a republic. On the other hand, I find Machiavelli's ideas the less realistic (out of the Three Political Philosophers) about human nature because dosen't agree with polite people. For example, he said "If a politician is interested in gaining and holding power, there is little room for being nice". I totally agree with that; however, I consider that is why nowadays most of the politicians are so unmoral and egoistic. We can expect from people/society (follow the laws-on a Republic-, help with the construction/development of the country, etc.), and government (being responsible of their actions, defend human rights, etc.).