der from the people he is governing. All that will matter to such a leader, ultimately, is the fanatical pursuit of power for its own sake.
This study will argue that latter point, using The Prince and the analysis of Machiavelli by Silvia Ruffo-Fiore in Niccolo Machiavelli. The fatal flaw in Machiavelli's thought is that he ascribes to the ideal leader qualities which he denies all other people. In fact, all human beings are deeply flawed in one way or another, all subject to corruption, and the greater the corruption and power, the grater damage the corrupted powerful leader will do. When Machiavelli advocates amorality in the prince, he introduces corruption. When such a leader, corrupt from the beginning, gather great power unto himself, he will inevitably bring great destruction to his own people and usually to people of other states.
Machiavelli would likely argue that he is profoundly realistic, for his principles of effective leadership, as laid out in The Prince, are based on what he sees as a cold-bloodedly realistic assessment of what it takes to gain power and keep power. From Machiavelli's perspective, the prince who is not willing to do whatever is necessary to get and keep power will not be able to be in a position of doing anything, for he will not become a leader at all, or if he does gain power, he will not long be able to keep it.
Those are Machiavelli's clear beliefs, but, of course, in reality, Machiavelli's complete disregard for moral elements of the prince's rise to and maintenance of power will inevitably lead to abuses of power which reflect fanaticism and/or Utopianism. The prince who takes The Prince to heart will not likely be a man concerned with any kind of utopia except one in which there is no threat to his power from within or without. Such a leader will assume that Machiavelli is correct when he advocates doing whatever is necessary to gain and keep political power.
In The Prince, Mach...