Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talk:Niccolò Machiavelli (view source)

Revision as of 16:58, March 21, 2009

405 bytes added ,  16:58, March 21, 2009
reply to PAuber
Line 31: Line 31:  
::: I just searched the Federalist Papers, the voluminous explanation and defense of our constitutional system by our Founders, and there is not a single reference to Machiavelli or Machiavellian.  As to your list of "conservative intellectual powerhouses," I don't recognize any of them as being Reagan-type conservatives.  Harvey Mansfield may come closest, but I'd be surprised if he were conservative on most leading social issues.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:51, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 
::: I just searched the Federalist Papers, the voluminous explanation and defense of our constitutional system by our Founders, and there is not a single reference to Machiavelli or Machiavellian.  As to your list of "conservative intellectual powerhouses," I don't recognize any of them as being Reagan-type conservatives.  Harvey Mansfield may come closest, but I'd be surprised if he were conservative on most leading social issues.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:51, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 
:::: However, there is also not a single reference to John Locke, who was an enormously large influence, in the Federalist Papers.  As for Ed's question, it's believe it's generally accepted that Machiavelli was writing for the specific circumstances of a fractured Italy, as he desired an enlightened prince to unify it through necessary means and then give control to a new republican body. By the way, can anyone explain why I was blocked for engaging in this discussion? [[User:PAuber|PAuber]] 12:47, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 
:::: However, there is also not a single reference to John Locke, who was an enormously large influence, in the Federalist Papers.  As for Ed's question, it's believe it's generally accepted that Machiavelli was writing for the specific circumstances of a fractured Italy, as he desired an enlightened prince to unify it through necessary means and then give control to a new republican body. By the way, can anyone explain why I was blocked for engaging in this discussion? [[User:PAuber|PAuber]] 12:47, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::: Well, fine, but there's no doubt that Locke influenced the Founding Fathers.  See, e.g., [http://www.gunstonhall.org/georgemason/timeline/chronology.html]  There is doubt about Machiavelli's influence on them.
 +
 +
::::: I see no record of your being blocked, but you will be blocked if you continue to delete information from the lectures.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:58, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
Aschlafly
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,911

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/642652"

Navigation menu