So, I read Machiavelli (1469-1527).
Through real politicians and fictional villains, Machiavelli's influence on culture is huge. This is a fascinating little book, more nuanced than I expected from Machiavillian pop culture villains, but still a rather bleak book of realpolitik.
'Many writers have dreamed up republics and kingdoms that bear no resemblance to experience and never existed in reality; there is such a gap between how people actually live and how they ought to live that anyone who declines to behave as people do, in order to behave as they should, is schooling himself for catastrophe: if you always want to play the good man in a world where most people are not good, you'll end up badly.'
There are a number of passages that resonate with contemporary debates over fiscal policy. Machiavelli recommends tax cuts rather than public spending: tax cuts can make you appear generous to those you are taking less from, while those that receive less from you as a result are a minority who's goodwill can be sacrificed to boost your popularity among those benefitting from the tax cuts.
You can't please everyone.
'If a ruler can't avoid hatred altogether, he must try to avoid the hatred of the country as a whole, and when that proves impossible he must do everything he can to escape the hatred of the classes that wield the most power.'
And don't forget that we want to reward hard work and aspiration: 'A ruler must show that he admires achievement in others... he should reassure his subjects that they can go about their business without worrying that if they increase their wealth they'll be in danger of having it taken away from them, or that if they start up a business they'll be punitively taxed.'
This Penguin edition has an excellent introduction that puts the book in historical context, and a surprisingly fascinating discussion on the difficulties of translating the work into contemporary English.
