Fun fact: This lecture was entirely improvised. The person who was supposed to give the lecture had an episode moments before going on stage and Dr. Sugrue filled in for him at the last second. He brought a blank piece of paper with him on stage to make the audience think he wasn't just making it up. This story was told on the Idea Store podcast Q&A part 3.

RIP Dr. Sugrue…. You provided us with hours upon hours of fascinating lectures & made our lives much more interesting…. A great man.

Hands down the best philosophy content on whole UKposts.

This man's handle on the English language is intimidating. He speaks so effortlessly, it's aaaaaaaMAZING

Strangely, it was the news of this mans passing that made me click on one of his lectures just out of curiosity and ive been non stop listening since. So a post-mortem thank you sir

Michael, I started watching your lectures 3yrs ago… I’m 34 and entered college last spring. your lectures hatched something in my soul. Now I’m majoring in political science, and minoring in philosophy.

Nothing more badass than lecturing for 42 minutes 50 seconds on how to be a villain, calling it "Machiavelli" and dropping it on youtube without further comment.

RIP DR. Torn by this news . Thank you for your beautiful contributions . May you rest in paradise.

These lectures are honestly the best philosophy content on youtube.

Dr. Michael Sugrue is Professor of History at Ave Maria University. A graduate of the Great Books Program, he earned his B.A. in History from the University of Chicago and his M.A., M.Phil., and Ph.D. in History from Columbia University. Prior to taking his position at Ave Maria University, Professor Sugrue taught at Princeton University, the City College of New York, Columbia University, Manhattan College, New York University, Hampton University, and Touro College. He served as the Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow at Johns Hopkins University from 1992 to 1994. Professor Sugrue was awarded the Chamberlain Fellowship, the President's Fellowship, the John Jay Fellowship, and the Meyer Padva Prize.

I was waiting for him to say "Mr. Anderson" the whole time. Gave me matrix vibes. Absolutely loved this lecture/talk whatever you wanna call it. Pure awesomeness

Wooow, the most fascinating talk I’ve ever heard. This guy is absolutely brilliant to give this off the top of his head

I am in awe of the detail, richness, context, clarity, urgency and relevance conveyed by this lecturer from his own memory apparently impromptu. An inspiring introductory lecture to Machiavelli. Regardless of his ultimate personal views, this professor really knows his subject matter.

Teaching is an art. What a brilliant teacher. 👏

If this was anyone else, the quality would be an issue. Sugrue… grabbing my popcorn.

have always been curious about Machiavelli's work, this was an incredible dive into these ideas

Great teacher..he explains the philosophy with so much interest and in simple terms that it is never boring...really a genius.

The Prince must be one of the oldest books I've read. I read it for no other reason than because I'd heard the author mentioned a great deal and I thought it was worth looking at. It seemed like pretty straightforward and fairly accurate description of power and its consequences. I've come to think that many people think of it as some kind of instruction manual, and I guess it is in a way, whether it is descriptive or prescriptive is one's own choice. Knowledge will only accentuate your existing character. It is only dangerous to a dangerous person, either in their hands or in the hands of those who haven't caught on to them

Had really wanted a lecture on Machiavelli for so long. Thank you for this!

Dr. Sugrue is spoiling us

I’ve been waiting for this one! These lectures are always appreciated

I love these lectures, thank you

I've been looking forward to this. Thanks Dr Sugrue.

I love these lectures!

This man makes Philosophy edible. Any time i sit to listen to his lectures, it's like mealtime. The appetite to eat the intellectual food he serves is so deep. Thanks for being a teacher.

Just from the title and thumbnail alone I can already tell that this is going to be the lecture of all lectures

Thank you so much for these videos Professor. You enrich our lives.

This lecturer is so bright and so thorough. 😮

I have learned so much from several of his talks, but this one is the one that just makes me giggle whenever I think of it. Evil genius.

I read the Prince as a teenager, really cool as a mature man to hear this again. Human nature is like a bag of snakes , not all are poisonous most are!!

Thank you for your work and contributions

The occasional sound of thunder in the background adds to the atmosphere of such a topic. As a somewhat bored office worker chained to my desk, these lectures are wonderful.

Excellent thinker, telling it how it is not how it ought to be. Fantastic lecture, cheers.

Just brilliant, thank you.

thank you for uploading this

I've been salivating waiting for this lecture.

I've read much of Machiavellis works. I didn't find the same man as you describe here. I found great wisdom and pragmatism, but not evil.

i've been waiting for this!!!!!!!! I'm so excited!!!

incredible lecture, thank you for upload

When you thought there were no more lectures

Ugh. These lectures are changing my life. Can’t thank you enough for sharing your knowledge with the world.

Thank you, sir. always

Thank you Dr Sugrue

Michael, if you’re reading this I just want you to know that your presentation here and this video have impacted me so much and helped me grow out of a lot of bad habits that were instilled in me when I was young . You’ve been a great role model in my adult life and I think about your words, your invaluable insights and your lectures almost every day ❤ Thank you again

More gems and knowledge. Thank you sir.

I loved reading The Prince at university. Much better than anything else on the reading list.

What a great speaker 🙏

Another new (old) one! Saved in my playlist. On Saturday morning I will take a coffee and sit in the garden to listen to Sugrue, looking forward, thank you!

I normally enjoy Dr. Sugrue's lectures, but this one was clearly a surface-level examination of Machiavelli. While "The Prince" is everything Sugrue said it is, the author was anything BUT a "prince" as he depicted it. Machiavelli wrote poetry and screenplays. The height of his political career was a foreign emissary-type post that let Machiavelli travel across Italy and Europe. He also didn't retire; he was exiled after being tortured by the faction that ousted the Medici for a time. And most damning to the lecture's assertion is the fact that Machiavelli was a great fan of the republican form of government. Even in "The Prince", Machiavelli says that tyranny is only a stepping stone to a better system. And nowhere in "The Prince" does Machiavelli assert that EVERYONE should act like a tyrant.

Thank you , seriously he teaches so well.

Unbelievably great thanks 🙏

Thank you for sharing. This was so digestible.

Ive been waiting for this one

8:50 worked for medeci family 1:40 Attainment of political power 4:20 Justice is from coercion. 6:24 Donald Trump - Art of the Deal 7:00 Religious morality 7:50 Joseph Stalin's favourite book 9:30 10:20 Medici prince flattery 11:10 Love is nice but fear is predictable 13:20 Wolf 17:30 The Lion and the fox 18:50 Military head over town 29:00 Freud 33:00 Rulers and people like sheep herders and sheep 33:30 Odysseus 35:30 Plato's cave 36:45 Those who have not sinned cast first stone

Great speaker - such an easy listen 👍

FANTASTIC Lecture!

When those violins hit you better be ready to kneel. Sugrue on Machiavelli! This one is going to be glorious

كمية كبيرة من المعلومات حصلت عليها بعد إنتهائي من مشاهدة هذه المحاضرة شكرا أستاذ 👏👏

He was FABULOUS. Wonderful thinker and speaker. Broad mind. Great listening.Time flew.

Great lecture about 2Pac, thanks❤️

Thank you & Happy MayDay

Amazing lectures!

Discovered Dr Michael Sugrue's content way too late. Incredible.

Brilliant lecture..thank you

Ahh the famous lecture - Sugrue ad-libbed it on the spot when the prof who was supposed to present suffered from stage fright.

What a video, even more impressive when you learn that this was improvised. It takes a deep understanding to be able to coherently and informatively speak on a topic for near an hour.

This was so good, that I had to rewinded to watch it again.

Absolutely precise and easy to understand! This lecture has given much more wider perspective to my study. Thanks for the wonderful lecture🎉♥️

oh my god I was searching for lectures from Dr Sugrue about Machiavelli, this is great!

Half way into this, and wow! What an insightful and elucidating lecture so far. Bravo.

Thanks very much for this.

Wow this was simple yet amazing

This fella doesn't get Italy in the middle ages. Machiavelli cast a cold, detached eye on human nature. Everything he describes informs out reality today. Machiavelli isn't evil, he's unapologetically analytical and honest.

One of the more important points made in the book that was not commented on in the video lecture is the control of fortune. Fortune, meaning chance, is something known since the ancients as limiting on what the good citizen and the good regime are. By chance, you are either born in a time where you can be both a good citizen and a good person (by way of being born into the good regime), or not. For Machiavelli, he notes that by chance, he was not born into an opportunity where he could ascend to political power, nor would his ideas take root. Think of the messenger from Nietzsche's thought, who came preaching into the town square, only to be laughed at and realize that he had been sent by fortune too early. So Machiavelli instead proposes that fortune, as impactful as it is in politics, should be limited and controlled by man, beaten into submission. This way, every regime would be the "good" regime. This very notion was put into practice by Modernism, where the goal of establishing a utopia, a heaven on earth, and removing chance from the equation by lowering the basis of the regime away from metaphysics and the good, something high, became the project. For this reason, I would disagree ever so slightly with Dr. Sugrue about Machiavelli's view of nature. Regarding human nature, there is no disagreement; but nature writ large, Machiavelli wanted to control it. Thus, we have the Enlightenment, and science becomes the ultimate tool of controlling nature, and politics the satisfaction of the most basic of human desires

Dope lecture, thanks for uploading!

Hands down the best form of articulation i have ever seen. Me who struggles to watch a 10min youtube video just watched this 40min video with full attention. Loved the way you just explained everything ❤

I'm very proud of you. Hopefully that means something. 😘

has nothing to do with being good or bad, he simply speaks the truth of gaining power

Amazing content. Worth watching despite the sound/image quality!

Thank you !

"Machiavelli was not really Machiavellian." Is the recurring pattern. He shortly wrote The prince after being released from where he underwent torture. That might explain his state of mind when he wrote that book. Its not that he was trying to suck up to the Medici while they were trying to avoid being seen as taking his advice but that the Florence court had already been practicing principles found in his book, whether conciously or unconsciously. Back then City states would create feeble alliances while at the same time plan on how to betray you six ways to Sunday. I see how his kind gesture to the Medici might have been seen as suspicious right after they came back to power.

Michael Sugrue is a top top lecturer - knows the material without referring to notes. Top class! Chapeau!

Thank You!

Thank you.

I disagree with sugrue’s view on machiavelli here. The prince does not appear to promote iniquity. It simply addresses the fact that it is not always possible to do what is good as doing so can lead to your (and your states) downfall. Machiavelli doesn’t choose fear over love. He choses both. However he acknowledges that in a conflict of interest between the two then fear is a more reliable option. That doesn’t make it right or more preferable. All of these lessons in the prince are to be employed to increase the quality of life of the populous. Machiavelli was writing in a time when weak leadership resulted in Italy’s integrity, faith and culture being up for sale to the highest bidder. Italy had become somewhat of a concubine due to hedonisitic men in power. the prince outlines the way to overthrow these men at their own game. However this is just my opinion so perhaps i am a fool.

Been wishing he'd do machiavelli! Sweet.

Awed by Dr surgrue's brilliance.

I owe Machiavelli alot. I read the Prince when I was 19 and it woke me up to all the political corruption and manipulation of our modern world. It changed me from a leninist socialist to a free thinking human being

in my youth i was interested in science 2 decades later im exploring philosophy

Incredible mind. Pls keep Up the good job.

RIP Legendary lecturer

He wins us all over. wish someone could find the lectures on Strauss and Moliere (1998 and 1993, respectively) by this wonderful man! ---and upload the two

His reference to Trump is such a synchronicity, not because of his rise to power but because how old the tropes around him have existed long before the presidency.

Thankyu. Gonna follow yu .. a true educator .. entertains and informs .. yu do both

Great ! Like it so much Full wisdom and realistic content!

I would like to hear more philosophy lectures like this from you, entirely from memory.

If you're interested in Machiavelli, you need to read James Burnham's "The Machiavellians." Very interesting, more recent historical significance. Burnham spends the first half of the book on a history lesson of the time of Machiavelli here, Sugrue mentions a lot of it in passing, but it's more significant than he lets on. The Holy Roman Empire first and foremost, among other rivals like France and the Ottoman Empire, was growing very powerful. And while these rivals were organizing, Italy's city states were indeed frail and floundering, mostly making metaphysical and classical arguments for why the aristocracy should rule, and flattering each other, and going to wars over petty things, and their people generally growing to resent their aristocracy. The Prince was really written to these people to say, quit fucking around, one of you has to rise up and be serious, or else the we'll all be speaking German. Here's the brass tacks practical manual for collecting power, and defending Italy from her neighbors. The second half of Burnham's book explains that that is an accurate and useful manual in a world of monarchist governments. In the late 1800s, as democracies had become popular, and the Industrial Revolution was causing lots of upheaval in the way societies looked at the nature of work, labor, relations to capital and corporations, relations to government, and toying with the ideas of Marxism, there were four Italian political philosophers, who all tried to take Machiavelli's spirit, and apply it to democratic environments. They asked, what is necessary to gather power in a democratic environment? Not, how do you game your royal rivals, but, how do your game your populace writ large and convince them to vote for you? How do you maintain long term democratic power? These were the people who laid the groundwork for Mussolini to pick up and form fascism. They were read by the early Soviets to establish Communism in Russia. In the 1940s, Burnham was writing to an American audience to understand the roots of totalitarianism, and how it was achieved through democracy, specifically by the use of mass media messaging, control of information, and corruption of journalism. Burnham was sounding the alarm on fake news in the 1940s and his book is still very relevant today.

thanks for uploading! very interesting subject

Beautifully said

I would argue that The Prince was written as a special case, like Marx's baseline assumptions for each of his volumes of Capital, about how the struggle for political power applies for and to monarchy, and pursuers of absolute power. It's advice for dictators and would-be dictators. That isn't necessarily what Macchiavelli actually believed in or wanted to see being done. He was trying to get a job, advertising his gifts as a political strategist to the dictators in the Rennaissance Italy, after he had lost the job he had trained for and believed in, as a government minister in his home Republic, to which he remained loyal. He had steeled himself to writing this job application in the form of a treatise on political science by considering that a tyrant who used his advice well, might be able to unify Italy and bring about peace and independence for its peoples who were subject not only to endemic internecine warfare and extortion by mercenaries, but invasion and interference at will by the kingdoms of France and the Hapsburg rulers of Spain and the Holy Roman Empire. His job application failed because in characterising the ruthless cunning of the ultimate Virile tyrant, he had inadvertantly and completely insulted the real men he was trying to appeal to, who didn't like to think of themselves as apt to evil nor wanted to be thought of as apt to evil whenever necessity prompted. His philosophical category of Virtus was cribbed from the ancients, based on a systematic review of ancient history, and while it wasn't so clearly stated by the writers of ancient Greece and Rome, it is clearly their cosmology, not the Biblical cosmology, which it belongs to. The Virtus of the Vir, the strong man, seduces and bends the will of _the gods_ to support his interests. It is the boldness which the gods favour, that quote so often paraphrased down to Goethe's "be bold and _mighty forces_ will come to your aid". Goethe was wishing to hide the polytheistic origin of the claim in his pretensions to being a modern, secular thinker. Those before him needed to hide that polytheism from their fellow Christians. But Macchiavelli as a Catholic Humanist like Erasmus was so used to referring to those pagan sources that he lets the cat out of the bag. Virtus is a pre-Christian concept. He's detailing a Classical heresy, which he thinks has political relevance, but again isn't necessarily what he believes in as a dutiful Catholic of his times.