Anton mentions that chapters 3-5 lay out Machiavelli’s central argument throughout The Prince. How would you summarize this argument made subtly throughout the three chapters?
After reading Anton’s article, do you think your understanding of the The Prince would change if chapters 3-5 were omitted?
If a Christian, as Machiavelli says, is weak and relay on outside sources, does that mean that they would be unable to conquer and take control of a place successfully?
“With the right strategy, the right kind of men, who learn from Christianity’s strengths and weaknesses, can replace Christianity.” Following what Machiavelli says, would this still be possible in modern times?