Vivere politico, vivere libero and vivere civile: Machiavelli and the "Machiavellian Democracy" by John P. McCormick

In his essay, J.P. McCormick discusses the means by which republic, either healthy or corrupt, should manage the political problem posed by socio-economic elites. In the former case, a healthy republic, the tribunate appears as the institution (not the only one, but the most important among them) through which to check the “insolence of the nobles”. Tribunate is an elective magistracies in which only individuals from the lower sort can be appointed. Moreover, a popular republic under the example of the ancient Rome must give birth to a mixed government system in which the people can exercise veto power, exercise some legislative functions and have an accusatory authority is deemed necessary to give stability to the necessary clashing between the humors of the Grandi - striving to dominate the majority - and the People seeking not to be dominated and live in a civic and free state. In the latter case, when a Republic is too corrupt to reform itself through the innovation of its institutions, law and customs, McCormick stressed the necessity according to Machiavelli to recur to a “Greek-style” tyrant in order to dominate and subdue the elites and to impose economic redistribution and military reform. In my contribution I will discuss the implications of such a thesis for the machiavellian distinction between vivere libero, vivere civile and vivere politico. I will argue that by dealing with the issue of a corrupt republic implies a specific re-ordering in the priorities between a free mode of live, a civic order and a political rule. In fact, when it is observed from the point of view of vivere libero, any form of principality must be rejected for it always imply a diminution of people freedom. I will then focus on machiavellian idea of economic redistribution to discuss the importante of this notion a specific reading of Machiavelli - that proposed by James Harrington - and to draw some observation on McCormick proposal for a “machiavellian” / popular enrichment of democracy, opposed to the more traditional liberal republic based on representative government and individualism.