Social and Political Philosophy

...

This is for the purpose of continual progress. However, the first thing that we should take into account is the decision of the people. If people chose wise leader, then such leader will have good leadership. If people chose leader without the ability of leadership, then such leader will have disordered leadership. People must not focus their attention on the personal issues of a leader, his private life, personal problems, because, instead of helping the leader, there is a tendency to create bad ideas about him and we might called those ideas as gossip.

If I am not mistaken, the term “corruption” is only applied to those who do not use properly the budget of the people. But, if the ability to nourish the country is seen, he is worthy of reward of tasting at least the product of his effort as a leader. Such is like two brothers in the midst of difficulties. If a younger brother is in crisis, it is an obligation of the elder brother to help him. But when the younger brother has already progressed, it is also time for the elder brother to taste the sweetness of his own work because he will also be given some honor as an elder. If, by selfishness, the elder brother did not help his brother in times of crisis, and when the younger brother progressed without his help, blame will follow from the latter.

In scholastic teaching, there are three sources of the morality of human act: the intention of the agent, the object, and the circumstances. The principle for one action is: human action is morally good if these three sources are all good. If one of them is evil, then human act is evil. If one will judge by this scholastic principle, the leaders whom Machiavelli gave as examples have no good human act since their intentions are not pure. It is therefore more appropriate that the intention of a leader must be, first, for the good of the state and then only followed by the good reputation.