Machiavelli: The Filthiest Political Scientist of All Time

It’s hard to overstate Machiavelli’s influence on our world.

“Machiavelli can be interpreted as the father of modern political science,” Britannica says. Or as one writer so candidly put it, “Machiavelli was the first thinker who freed political science or theory from the clutches of religion and morality.”

People claim that he was an objective scholar, or a scientist of sorts (political science). He is studied by businessmen, politicians and professors.

I had the honor to recently publish a much needed corrective to this mainstream narrative, by the best-selling Catholic Brazilian philosopher, Olavo de Carvalho, Machiavelli or the Demonic Confusion.

Olavo shows that the common view on Machiavelli is wrong, because Machiavelli was, in fact, a demonic liar.

It is easy to show that Machiavelli was a liar. He himself admitted as much. He wrote a letter explaining, “For some time now, I never say what I think, nor do I think what I say, and even if I tell the truth sometimes, I hide it among so many lies, that it’s hard to find it again.”

Is this how a serious scholar talks? The idea is risible.

Olavo further shows that Machiavelli didn’t merely write half-truths about inconsequential matters, but rather, he deceived people into doing evil. Machiavelli did this by quoting the Bible, then flipping its meaning upside down, thus simultaneously urging people to be faithful to the Bible all while committing atrocities.

Olavo explains that successful students of Machiavelli will: “pose before the masses as a new God and make them believe that they are worshiping God when they kneel before the Devil-Prince.”

Does this remind anyone of Stalin? Hitler? Both students of The Prince.

To “cross-check” Olavo’s thesis, I went ahead and read a biography of Machiavelli by Alexander Lee. I figured, there should be traces in the facts of Machiavelli’s life indicating whether he was a scholar, or in fact, demonic.

This study proved most illuminating, if unpleasant.

Machiavelli was a cheating whoring pedophile. And that really understates the case.

Machiavelli was married, yet Lee writes, “He divided his time between his long-term mistress, La Riccia, and Donato del Corno’s shop, which appears to have doubled as a male brothel. He spent so much time with them, in fact, that he was worried he was getting on their nerves.”

That doesn’t seem like the life style of a great philosopher.

A friend of Machiavelli, Vettori, advised him that he, “shouldn’t waste time trying to appease [La Riccia]. Instead he should stick to a boy named Riccio — who seems to have been his regular squeeze at Donato’s shop.”

Machiavelli’s deviant behavior spanned most or all of his life. He positively reveled in it.

For instance, consider his letter to Vettori about how he scoured the alleys of the town for a “rent boy,” or a “bird,” as Machiavelli put it. Upon finding his “young thrush” he “started kissing it” and then “ministered to several of its hind feathers.”

But this story is just getting started.

Machiavelli realized that the boy couldn’t see his face in the darkness, so introduced himself giving the name of an acquaintance, Casavecchia, and said he didn’t have money on him now, so to go to his [Casavecchia’s] shop tomorrow to get payment. The boy then did this, at which point Casavecchia promptly guessed Machiavelli was behind the stunt.

What type of life was Machiavelli living, that when a boy is sodomized and lied to, you just assume he’s the guy behind it?

One final Machiavelli story. And a warning, this is disgusting stuff. But it’s worth sharing for the simple fact that Machiavelli is accepted, no, not just accepted, but actually studied and adulated. For instance, a recent book release is titled Machiavelli for Women: Defend Your Worth, Grow Your Ambition, and Win the Workplace, and has 4.5 stars with well over a hundred reviews.

If women want to channel Machiavelli, that’s their choice, but they should at least know who they are dealing with.

Anyway, Machiavelli wrote a friend explaining how he was invited into the house of an old woman, which was partly below ground and thus dark, to be with a prostitute. Afterwards, he lit a fire, and, well, go ahead and read Machiavelli’s own words:

“No sooner was the lamp lit then it almost fell from my hands. Ye gods! I nearly dropped dead on the spot, that woman was so ugly. The first thing I saw was a clump of hair, part white and part black — in other words, sort of whitish, and although the crown of her head was bald (thanks to this baldness, one could see a few lice parading around), a few isolated wisps of hair still came down to her eyelids… As I stood there, totally bewildered and astonished to behold this monster, she noticed and tried to say: ‘What’s the matter, sir?’ but she could not get the words out, because she stuttered; and as soon as she opened her mouth, there issued a breath so smelly that my eyes and nose — the two portals to the two most easily offended senses — were assaulted by this stink, and my stomach was so appalled that it was unable to bear such an outrage; it gurgled, and having gurgled, it started to retch — so much that I threw up all over her.”

You can see that not lightly do I describe Machiavelli as “filthy.”

The plausibility of Olavo’s thesis, that Machiavelli advanced demonic ideas, is confirmed in the life of Machiavelli himself beyond a doubt. There is nothing at all in the facts of Machiavelli’s life to suggest that his identity was that of a wise man, a scholar, a political scientist. He was a total deviant.