Niccolo Machiavelli and His Influence on Lesotho Political Rulers

In his famous “The Prince”, Machiavelli drastically differs from all political writing of ancient antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance that had one central question: the end of the state. Machiavelli assumes that power is an end in itself, and maintains that the ruler ought to focus on acquiring, retaining and expanding power. While the moralist adheres to the supremacy of his moral code and the ecclesiastic to his religious code, Machiavelli recognizes the supremacy of the precepts of his code in politics: the acquisition, retention and expansion of power. It is argued that most Lesotho political rulers follow in the footsteps of Machiavelli, and this has occurred from gaining independence in the Mountain Kingdom. For Lesotho political rulers heavily influenced by Machiavelli’s amorality, power is regarded as an end in itself. Consequently, the Mountain Kingdom governed by ruthless and tyrant rulers whose aim is to retain and expand power, have subjects who live below poverty line.


Introduction
The economic situation started declining in the Mountain Kingdom since when it gained Independence from the colonial rule in 1965. In this essay I show that this economic deterioration that has led Lesotho to be below poverty line is to a great extent caused by tyrant rulers who regard power as an end in itself.
I consider Niccolo Machiavelli as the inspirer and model of many corrupt African rulers. I am going to confine myself to the rulers reigned in the Mountain Kingdom since its independence. Machiavelli  was more inclined towards politics as such and less concerned with political philosophy.
Having lost his job he resorted to writing two books: The Prince and the Discourses. The Prince that made him famous depicted him as being very notorious since he explicitly expressed his immorality and preferred amorality when comparing the statesman with religion and morality.
In his The Prince, Machiavelli intends to impress the Prince (the Medici) hoping to be re-employed by www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/sssr Studies in Social Science Research Vol. 2, No. 2, 2021 10 Published by SCHOLINK INC. him. He advises the Prince to ignore religion and morality if he aspires to be a successful ruler. He admonishes him to have a clear and straight forward goal: the acquisition, retention and expansion of power. He argues that the ruler will obtain power only if he uses the second method of fighting, that is, the method of beasts. In this way, if the ruler wants to achieve his goal, namely, power, he must be cruel and ruthless. Machiavelli regards Pope Alexander VI as his model and idolizes his illegitimate son Cesare Borgia because they were tyrant rulers. In short, Machiavelli disregards democracy and considers tyranny as the best form of government.
It is argued in this paper that Lesotho political rulers regard power as an end in itself. This became clear Machiavelli advised the Prince to disregard religion and morality. The first Prime Minister of Lesotho pretended to value the system of the state and religion, and ignored morality. From 1970 onward he used the Armed Forces of Lesotho and ruthlessly assassinated opposition members of the B.C.P. who had won the 1970 general elections. His heinous immoral acts clearly demonstrated that he was now a Christian by name. In this essay I argue that stability in politics and economic growth in Lesotho can be attained only if political rulers in Lesotho hold to one central question: the end of the state.

The End of the State and Power as an End in Itself
2.1 All political writing from ancient antiquity, more especially classical political philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle, including all political writings of the Middle Ages and Renaissance had one central question, and that is the end of the state. Jointly at different times these classic thinkers maintained that power was assumed to be a means only. The means referred to were solely to a great extent intended to serve and lead to high ends such as the good life and justice. Given that the ancient, Middle Ages and Renaissance eras were predominantly religious societies, political power was also assumed to be a means leading to God. Given the fact that the rulers' primary role was to serve, they assumed political power to respond to the needs of the people. Undoubtedly, in this way, selfishness was a vice shunned by the rulers since it would blur their primary goal, that is, the end of the state. These rulers were clearly not opportunist time-observers, rather, they acted courageously and fearlessly for eternal changeless truths and for the good well-being of their fellow citizens ruled.
In his Republic, Plato expressly stated that the State exists in order to serve the wants of men.
According to Plato, the State exists not only to further the economic needs of humans, but also for developing them in the good life, administering justice and ensuring that they finally attain happiness.
Clearly, all these are in accordance with responding to the central question: the end of the state.
In the Laws, Plato stated that the State in which the law is above the rulers, and the rulers are the inferiors of the law, has salvation and every blessing which the gods can confer. The rulers assume power not taking into consideration their birth or wealth, rather, assumption of power is due to personal character, fitness for ruling, and rulers must at all times be subject to the law. In Platonic political philosophy the end of the State is general justice. Inevitably, in this sense the ruler assumes political power to administer justice.
For Aristotle, rulers of a representative democracy violate individuals' autonomy. "Representative government removes the individual too far from day-to-day decision-making to allow it to count as giving the individual the degree of control over his or her life which the exercise of phronesis requires" (Taylor, 1995, p. 242). Undoubtedly, Aristotle follows into the footsteps of Plato. This is why like Plato, he also is disgusted with representative democracy of tyrannical rulers who are exclusively selfish. In his communitarian form of government the subjects devote their entire lives for the common good of the polis, just as the monarch does likewise. The polis is conceived as a community existing for the sake of the good life.
2.2 Machiavelli assumes that power is an end in itself. For Machiavelli, the Prince, who happens to be the ruler ought to be self-centred and exclusively selfish. His success in government will depend on one condition that he entirely regards power as an end in itself. Machiavelli is strongly convinced that for the ruler to attain his end, he must resort to war. "Military strength was to remain for Machiavelli the basis of healthy political life; and Germany and Switzerland were to remain his prime examples of modern political virtue" (Anglo, 1969, p. 53). Regardless how ruthless this means to reach his goal to the moralist or religious person, Machiavelli holds that this is laudable to the ruler since assuming power as an end itself is achievable mainly by resorting to war. In this way, "it is necessary for a prince, wishing to maintain himself, to know how not to be good, and to use thisor not use thisaccording to necessity" (Anglo, 1969, p. 68). All that counts for Machiavelli is that the ruler must at all times assume power as an end in itself. He strongly stresses that this is a necessity that is strictly mandatory.
Machiavelli is preoccupied with devising means that are most suitable for the ruler to get hold of the acquisition, retention and expansion of power. He reverses all political writing that preceded him. For Machiavelli, the one central question is no longer the end of the state, but rather the quest to acquire, retain and expand power.
2.3 Lesotho political rulers assume that power is an end in itself I assume that all political writing from ancient antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance with their  (Khaketla, 1971, p. 8). The Marematlou Freedom Party's point of view was strongly supported by Chief Leabua Jonathan, leader of another minority party, the Basutoland National Party in his declaration: "I similarly cannot agree that the Head of the Armed Forces should be the Prime Minister. In the memorandum of our Party we have specifically stated that this power be invested in the Head of State" (Khaketla, 1971, p. 9). Undoubtedly, aware of the unlikelihood of winning the coming first general elections in the history of the Mountain Kingdom, the two minority parties representing their minority parties sought for refuge to the King.
They, therefore, proposed that the Head of State should be "Head of the Armed Forces of Lesotho".
They already foresaw that political rulers were inclined to assume power as an end in itself; in this way if one assumed power, he would be highly tempted to use the Armed Forces to retain and expand power for himself.
But, the party followed by the majority, namely, the Basutoland Congress Party strenuously opposed the amendment that the Head of State should be "Head of the Armed Forces of Lesotho". Leader of the  (Khaketla, 1971, p. 70). Leabua's insatiable lust for power was now obvious; immediately after winning the elections he visited London requesting to be vested with power.
Obviously, he echoed Machiavelli's claim that power is an end in itself, and he shunned the central question of the end of the state.
Earlier in 1964 when assuming that the leader of the Basutoland Congress Party was likely going to win the elections, he supported the idea of investing powers of being in control of the Police and the Armed Forces of Lesotho upon the Head of State; "But now that he was the Prime Minister, he saw no reason why they should not be transferred to him" (Khaketla, 1971, pp. 71-72). No wonder why Khaketla reports that when the British Government bestowed all the powers upon Leabua Jonathan, he organized a big cocktail party in Maseru at his home. In his report that he has been granted "control of the Police Force, he pointed at Chief 'Maseribane as the man who would see that the Armed Forces was used for the maintenance of law and order. The latter beamed with pride, and bowed several times" (Khaketla, 1971, p. 73). 'Maseribane was the Deputy Prime Minister; they celebrated the acquired acquisition of power and presumably hoped for its retention and expansion. Indeed they retained and expanded that power for twenty years. Undoubtedly, the priority for these political rulers was to assume power as an end itself. From the onset they were not primarily interested in the common good; rather, they sought for power they needed to retain and expand power for two decades. Cesare Borgia remained and was regarded by Machiavelli as a model to be imitated by all ambitious political rulers thirsting for power. Machiavelli was convinced that "The fact is that Cesare offered an example of a certain dramatic, and relevant, aspect of virtue; and, more important, his special advantages suggested a striking parallel with the present situation of the Medici" (Anglo, 1969, p. 78).

Machiavelli Idolizes Cesare Borgia
Machiavelli was attracted to Cesare's ruthlessness that led to his success as the Duke of Valentino.
Cesare's ruthlessness and cruelty could be seen when he brutally assassinated his older brother and mercilessly murdered the husband of his only sister Lucrezia.  (Khaketla, 1971, p. 64). Undoubtedly, the two minority parties, namely, the M.F.P. and B.N.P. were sensing that the B.C.P. Clearly, aware of his huge following, the B.C.P. leader, already anticipating his win regarding the coming general elections, started humiliating and threatening other political parties, the chiefs and even the King himself. No wonder why a few days before the general elections he said: "we remove the British today, and the next hurdle will be the Chiefs and proceeded to emphasize clearly that among the Chiefs he included the Paramount Chief" (Khaketla, 1971, p. 65 Forces to be used to crush the Opposition even if that Opposition was led by himself" (Khaketla, 1971, p. 66). Undoubtedly, the leader of B.N.P. was conscious of the fact that a thirst for power was innate in political leaders, a thirst that would lead to the elimination of political leaders using the Armed Forces  (Khaketla, 1971, p. 21 to prepare handing over power to Ntsu Mokhehle, leader of the victorious B.C.P. On the contrary, Chief Leabua's voice on Radio Lesotho boomed: "I, the Prime Minister of Lesotho, in terms of the Constitution, hereby declare Lesotho to be in a state of emergency" (Khaketla, 1971, p. 209). This declared state of emergency was followed by a legion of ruthless killings of the Opposition by the On the contrary, Machiavelli's use of the term "virtue" is different and antithetical to the Christian concept of virtue. In pre-Christian Rome the term "virtue" derived from the Latin "vir", that is, man meant "manliness"; and this meant military courage. Machiavelli applies the term 'virtue' referring to the glorious and highly successful political ruler of his dreams. Machiavelli's victorious winning ruler is far from being a practicing Church goer. He is actually characterized by ruthlessness and cruelty. In other words, he alienates himself from religion; all he does is to pretend to be religious while strongly encouraging his subjects to practice religion so that they consistently obey him.
Inevitably, an ecclesiastic cannot admit a rival to his religious code. A serial killer characterized by cruelty and ruthlessness is categorically condemned in religion. On the other hand, Machiavellian statesman is solely guided by the precepts of his code, and his end is crystal clear: the acquisition, retention and expansion of power. To attain this end the statesman ought to be cruel and ruthless.
Machiavelli exhorts a ruler "not to encourage such Christian virtues as patience, meekness, mercy, humility, self-denial, compassion" (Omoregbe, 2010, p. 61 (Khaketla, 1971, p. 24). The Mountain Kingdom being predominantly Christian and the Catholic Church having a majority following, urged him to be a practicing Catholic, and he pretended to be doing so.
The Basutoland National Party was launched by Chief Leabua Jonathan strongly encouraged and supported by the Roman Catholic Church authorities in Lesotho. Undoubtedly, "there is little room for doubt that the idea of such a party [i.e., the B.N.P.] was the brain-child of Roman Catholic authorities, at a high level" (Khaketla, 1971, p. 20 Eventually, the leader of B.C.P. and the many prominent figures of B.C.P. had to flee the country and settle temporarily in Botswana as refugees. Thus, the results of the tyrant political ruler in Lesotho, the man who pretended to value the system of the state and that of religion and morality were undoubtedly disastrous.

Conclusion
In his The Prince, Machiavelli attempts to separate morality and religion from politics. He regards politics as being autonomous and independent from morality and religion. He admonishes the ruler immoral means such as ruthlessness, cruelty and brutality to retain power.
Unlike his predecessors in politics, Machiavelli does not regard political power on the assumption that it is primarily a means serving higher ends. For him, power is primarily an end in itself. He then strongly advices the Prince, that is, the ruler to aim first and foremost on the acquisition, retention and expansion of power. To obtain this goal the ruler ought to have resort to immoral means such as brutality, cruelty, dishonesty and the like. Just as Pope Alexander VI the most admired man by Machiavelli shrewdly made assurances and often used his personal hangman and poisoner to obtain his goal, he admonishes the ruler to be shrewd and use his most trusted army in his pursuit and retention of power.
Similarly Machiavelli's Italy was politically weak and divided. Consequently, the economic situation of Italy was unstable. In like manner, since 1965 when Lesotho gained Independence, the Mountain Kingdom has consistently been politically weak and at war. The economic situation as an end in itself is that they use the Armed Forces of Lesotho primarily to obtain their goal, that is, power. The Armed Forces of Lesotho are no longer serving as the protectors of the Nation, but as mere means to ensure that the masters retain and expand their power.
According to my own point of view, the preferable solution that can redeem Lesotho from its Political power ought to be assumed by rulers in the Mountain Kingdom as a means mainly in the service of higher ends. In this way, rulers will in practice be servants of the people who have authorized them to govern by their votes, not as masters who hunger for power. This can bring a gentle stop to unwanted assassinations caused by a lust for power.