Art of War by Niccolo Machiavelli Niccolo Machiavelli understood the relationships between politics and war very well, and believed that there was a causal relationship between these two crucial pillars of society. An examination of the author's 16th century text, The Art of War, readily demonstrates as much. In Machiavelli's view, war was an essential function of politics as manifested by the state. As such, the author had very opinionated beliefs about what sort of state could optimize the function of war, what sort of effect a state had on its soldiers, and how the political virtues exemplified by the state would inherently affect its soldiers and war prospects. Within this text the author emphasizes the value of politics in terms of its effect on creating a desirable state entity, while arguing that war is nothing more than a function of the state and its politics/political agenda.

The most interesting aspect of this viewpoint readily espoused within this book (which one may argue appears to be its central theme) is the circumscriptions that it places on other aspects of society and life within the state. One of the central reasons Machiavelli has adopted this particular stance is to limit the agenda and the activity of private citizens, mercenaries, and others who may be looking to capitalize on warfare -- to the detriment of their governing body. In fact, the author explicitly states in a number of ways that the separation of the military from civilian life is necessary to the maintenance of the state, while alluding to the fact that this separation should be one of the chief aims of the state's politics. He observed that, "there are no things less in agreement with one another or so dissimilar as the civilian and military lives" (Machiavelli). However, he ardently believed that the best source of soldiers for the military would be its private citizens -- but only in times of war when the state (and not the civilians) deemed that their participation was necessary. The concept is slightly paradoxical, but a noteworthy one nonetheless....

Civilians were only necessary for the waging of war when the state required them; otherwise they were considerably more desirable as civilians. By utilizing its human resources in such a way, the politics of the state would play the central determinant in the need and variety of war.
The slightly contradictory nature of this point makes further elucidation necessary, and also ties into another vital point of The Art of War. The author repeatedly refers to the civilizations of antiquity, and of Rome in particular, as the model society upon which Florence should base its principles of politics and warfare. The role of private citizens was considerably limited during the heyday of the Roman Empire, a fact which may be understood most saliently when comparing it to societies outside of antiquity such as modern America in which private interests (either in the form of corporate entities or private security companies) readily account for martial actions on the part of the state. The purported oil interests and usage of private troops in the Iraq War justify this fact, and are roundly disparaged and eschewed by Machiavelli in The Art of War. Due to the precedent set by the Roman Empire, the author recommends avoiding a political situation in which individuals can effect careers and livelihoods out of military involvement, and instead espoused an ideal akin to that of Rome in which, "as long as she was well organized -- which she was until the time of the Gracchi -- Rome did not have a single soldier who assumed that duty as a profession" (Machiavelli).

Because of the author's strong reliance upon Rome as the model for which the political situation and the state function of warfare is based, it is essential to understand what form of politics that situation requires to utilize war as a mechanism of the state. Ironically, (especially when one considers the foundations of the U.S.), Machiavelli believes that a republican state is the most desirable manifestation of a political situation in terms of its effect of properly using war as…