The end does not justify the means
Day 1,855, 00:15
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by wingfield
“The Prince?”
Many people quote, from my old friend Niccolo Machiavelli, a piece about the ends justifying the means. Old Nick and I go back a long way. He helped me get very high grades in Renaissance history at university!
Niccolo Machiavelli
However, as is too often the case, Niccolo is quoted right out of context. Let us look at what he said, where he said it and the purpose of his writing.
“In the actions of all men, and especially of princes, where there is no court of appeal, one judges by the result. So let a prince set about the task of conquering and maintaining his state; his methods will always be judged honorable and will be universally praised. The common people are always impressed by appearances and results.”
This quotation is from near the end of Chapter 18 of The Prince. The Chapter title is “How princes should honor their word”. It is all about appearances and it is all about princes. It is not about ordinary people and Machiavelli reminds us of this in the very next sentence after the quoted text.
The Prince is not a moral text. It is a satire disguised as a practical piece, written for an absolute ruler by a purged member of the recently overthrown popular republic. Machiavelli wanted to be rehabilitated and he wrote just what he felt the restored Medici ruler wanted to read. He hoped that his princely reader did not see through his satire!
The princely reader
What Machiavelli is demonstrating that what may be DONE by (absolute) rulers is not what ordinary people should do themselves. When the “common people” are the rulers, ethics and morality DO count.
We have no right to violate ethical and moral principles because we consider that the result will be right or good.
We do not have to subscribe to anyone’s pet religion to adhere to correct principles. It is a clear and logical philosophical question.
How does this translate into eRepublik?
We are all “common” or ordinary people. There are no “princes”. If there were, it would not be eRepublik. We play by the rules or are condemned for cheating. The law that governs us is the eRepublik law that says “one person, one account” and that people administering multiple accounts get banned. Administering any account other than our own is plain wrong.
In the eUS, we see numerous examples of players banned for administering multiple accounts. Many of them are identified with the group trying to take over the country. Using the same tactic as these people is unacceptable. It lowers us to their level. The “end” of defeating a takeover does not justify cheating as the “means” to the end. Either way, democracy and the common good are the definite loser.
Loyal Americans are defending our country. We must never shatter their morale by engaging in the tactics used by our enemies.
Whoever says that running multiple accounts is acceptable and say that we, who feel that we should not be doing such a thing, are missing the point or being naïve, is no democrat. In fact they are nothing but absolutists, just like Machiavelli’s prince.
Many people quote, from my old friend Niccolo Machiavelli, a piece about the ends justifying the means. Old Nick and I go back a long way. He helped me get very high grades in Renaissance history at university!
Niccolo Machiavelli
However, as is too often the case, Niccolo is quoted right out of context. Let us look at what he said, where he said it and the purpose of his writing.
“In the actions of all men, and especially of princes, where there is no court of appeal, one judges by the result. So let a prince set about the task of conquering and maintaining his state; his methods will always be judged honorable and will be universally praised. The common people are always impressed by appearances and results.”
This quotation is from near the end of Chapter 18 of The Prince. The Chapter title is “How princes should honor their word”. It is all about appearances and it is all about princes. It is not about ordinary people and Machiavelli reminds us of this in the very next sentence after the quoted text.
The Prince is not a moral text. It is a satire disguised as a practical piece, written for an absolute ruler by a purged member of the recently overthrown popular republic. Machiavelli wanted to be rehabilitated and he wrote just what he felt the restored Medici ruler wanted to read. He hoped that his princely reader did not see through his satire!
The princely reader
What Machiavelli is demonstrating that what may be DONE by (absolute) rulers is not what ordinary people should do themselves. When the “common people” are the rulers, ethics and morality DO count.
We have no right to violate ethical and moral principles because we consider that the result will be right or good.
We do not have to subscribe to anyone’s pet religion to adhere to correct principles. It is a clear and logical philosophical question.
How does this translate into eRepublik?
We are all “common” or ordinary people. There are no “princes”. If there were, it would not be eRepublik. We play by the rules or are condemned for cheating. The law that governs us is the eRepublik law that says “one person, one account” and that people administering multiple accounts get banned. Administering any account other than our own is plain wrong.
In the eUS, we see numerous examples of players banned for administering multiple accounts. Many of them are identified with the group trying to take over the country. Using the same tactic as these people is unacceptable. It lowers us to their level. The “end” of defeating a takeover does not justify cheating as the “means” to the end. Either way, democracy and the common good are the definite loser.
Loyal Americans are defending our country. We must never shatter their morale by engaging in the tactics used by our enemies.
Whoever says that running multiple accounts is acceptable and say that we, who feel that we should not be doing such a thing, are missing the point or being naïve, is no democrat. In fact they are nothing but absolutists, just like Machiavelli’s prince.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
The ends DO NOT justify the means.
“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy.
All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
~ Hermann Goering
Setting aside that this is a game for a minute, the forum crowd (Admins in particular) are moral relativists in my experience. Frankly, some of that is youth, and some is desensitivity to righteous behavior via a life spent in a pretend world, or a world where one piece of information has no more actual significance than any other.
Their character can be morally bereft because the character is pretend.
But then anyway, again, it's a game really. But no more faking the high ground eh?
@ Candor - yes. I might be coming from a secular moral perspective but I recall that the Pope condemns "moral relativism" too. Good point.
[removed]
Agreement to you by another:
http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/chronicles-of-insanity-269772/1
Like the article! Voted!
YES MEANS USED ARE JUSTIFIED BY RESULTS
V!
Thanks for the plug Weasel2.
This article is far more eloquent than I was though. Voted.
Voted, never realized that the prince was a satirical work.
😁^ Quite true but a handbook for absolutists nonetheless. Machiavelli recognised that the despots would not succeed without using methods that should not be used by decent ordinary people! The satire is an underlay.
Excellent article; voted and shouted.
@Candor. It is inexact to put morality on a game, but I would classify the forum crowd as "playing to win" (there is a very good website/article on the forum that I have previously linked on this topic sirlin.net/ptw). Essentially, the current game mechanics--as stated to us by the eRep admins--say the eUSA should multi back to counteract the PTO thread. It would be silly not to exploit this. If the eRep admins chose the proper course--adding deportation and banning multis--I would be much happier. But I live within the system they have created and am bound by those mechanics. It would be not fun to live in a PTO'd country so I will advocate for anything within mechanics that pushes us away from that.
v+s
From Ceres, Chapter Forty-Three by L. Neil Smith:
"The ends do not justify the means. The means help to insure that the ends are just."
--The Diaries of Rosalie Frazier Ngu
@Publius: "Essentially, the current game mechanics--as stated to us by the eRep admins--say the eUSA should multi back to counteract the PTO thread."
How do you come to this conclusion when the 3rd Law of eRepublik says otherwise? Deportation is not a requirement of the game and multis do get banned. The Admins set the rules. Just because you may not like them, doesn't make it acceptable to break them.
Aristocracy is in fashion, that is all.
First off--it has nothing to do with me liking or disliking the rules.
Second--I do not break them. But I will defend those that justly do.
Third--Your conclusion does not follow from your premise Lysander. We have complained to the admins and sent tickets about multiing and the PTO. They have acknowledged it as a reality. It is difficult for them to be zealous about banning multis because real people get banned too (the test is not perfectly specific). Rather than annoy their user base (through unjust bans), their recommendation is that we multi to combat the threat.
So, yes, the admins do set the rules and this policy is carrying out their will.
So in the end Admin is applying the 'ends justify the means', if all mulities are banned then there would be no need to mulitie back; I and many others do not buy gold because no matter what we do with the gold someone can cheat and take it all away....
@Publius: Feel free to send me a screencap of their specific recommendation that we multi to combat the threat. I'll be glad to open a ticket to request that the 3rd Law be rescinded based upon their recommendation. If they turn me down (very likely) , at least it'll be on the record.
Publius, “Essentially, the current game mechanics--as stated to us by the eRep admins--say the eUSA should multi back to counteract the PTO thread. ... They have acknowledged it as a reality. It is difficult for them to be zealous about banning multis because real people get banned too (the test is not perfectly specific). Rather than annoy their user base (through unjust bans), their recommendation is that we multi to combat the threat. So, yes, the admins do set the rules and this policy is carrying out their will."
I realize that I'm really late commenting here, but I too would like to see a screen shot please. Also, you only have to look at your own friends' friends lists, to see that many of them, including American players playing for the eUSA, have numerous accounts, whole bot farms in some cases.
What is of interest to me personally, is that while I have spoken with ADMIN on several occasions, they absolutely refused to acknowledge that certain teams are routinely targeted, with bans generously handed out, while other teams remain untouched.
In fact Publius, I spoke with them at length for the very reason which you cite that they gave to you, for being unable to administer the bans. Namely, honest accounts / players were banned as well, with all of their assets, everything gone for good. You could appeal up the old wazoo, the ADMIN would not overturn any of their decisions.
So I am very interested in what you're saying & would really appreciate any reply, especially in light of this most recent experience with ADMIN with a bought account. I'd really appreciate it if you would please read this article & comment if possible.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/--2179671/1/20
If the rules have changed & the game is now an "anything goes" fiasco, then it would be nice for all of the players to be aware. However, I suspect these "modified rules" only apply to specific types of players & only when playing on very specific teams.
Thanks.