Machiavelli argues in the Discourses that a prince who relies on popular goodwill as his fortress is more secure than one constrained by law, making constitutional checks redundant when self-interest aligns with public good.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Constitutional checks(the mechanisms Rousseau thinks don't work as intended): Built-in limits and balances in a government's rules that are supposed to prevent any one person or group from becoming too powerful.
Machiavelli(The subject of the statement being discussed): An Italian Renaissance political thinker (1469-1527) who wrote practical advice for rulers based on how power actually works, rather than how it should work in theory.
fortress(A metaphor describing how public support functions as protection): A fortified stronghold that protects against attack; here used as a metaphor for something that provides security and defense.
popular goodwill(Describes what keeps a ruler secure according to this argument): The support, trust, and positive feelings that ordinary people have toward their leader.

Based on where you are in your exploration