A people, says Machiavel, that is corrupt, is not capable of
a commonwealth. But in showing what a corrupt people is, he has
either involved himself, or me; nor can I otherwise come out of
the labyrinth, than by saying, the balance altering a people, as
to the foregoing government, must of necessity be corrupt; but
corruption in this sense signifies no more than that the
corruption of one government, as in natural bodies, is the
generation of another. Wherefore if the balance alters from
monarchy, the corruption of the people in this case is that which
makes them capable of a commonwealth. But whereas I am not
ignorant that the corruption which he means is in manners, this
also is from the balance. For the balance leading from
monarchical into popular abates the luxury of the nobility, and,
enriching the people, brings the government from a more private
to a more public interest which coming nearer, as has been shown,
to justice and right reason, the people upon a like alteration is
so far from such a corruption of manners as should render them
incapable of a commonwealth, that of necessity they must thereby
contract such a reformation of manners as will bear no other kind
of government. On the other side, where the balance changes from
popular to oligarchical or monarchical, the public interest, with
the reason and justice included in the sane, becomes more
private; luxury is introduced in the room of temperance, and
servitude in that of freedom, which causes such a corruption of
manners both in the nobility and people, as, by the example of
Rome in the time of the Triumvirs, is more at large discovered by
the author to have been altogether incapable of a commonwealth.
Pages:
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112