The name Niccolo Machiavelli is controversial. His work has become so synonymous with cunning political strategy, it gave rise to the term Machiavellianism: the use of manipulation and deceit to achieve self-interested goals.We sneer at the Renaissance statesman and political philosopher’s deeply shrewd and scheming nature – but we still introduce his ideas as foundational theories in our politics classes and studies of power.Much of his 15th-century writing, including the infamous The Prince, is often thought to serve unscrupulous politicians. Yet it also offers valuable insights for modern political and business leaders, as well as political scientists, students of political science – and really, anyone seeking to make sense of the political world.Why is The Prince a classic? As a political scientist, I consider The Prince a classic because of its bold realism. It responds to how the world is, rather than how it should be.Instead of offering idealistic visions of leadership, Machiavelli presents a clear-eyed observation of how power is gained and retained in the real world. Many of the traits he describes – including adaptability, strategic communication, and the careful balance between fear and love – still shape political leadership today.The book is divided into 26 short chapters and spans just 105 pages, making it a quick read. Each chapter explores how to acquire and maintain power in a particular scenario, offering practical advice to rulers navigating various political landscapes.The Prince was originally written in vernacular Italian. I read the English translation by W.K. Marriott, which preserves Machiavelli’s pithy brevity and serious tone. He was no facile phrasemonger; the circumstances in which he wrote demanded precision.Marriott praises Machiavelli’s themes as lofty, his substance as grave, and his style as nobly plain. Niccolo Machiavelli observes how power is gained and retained in the real world. Santi di Tito/Wikipedia Reality as it is – not how it should beMachiavelli’s realism is not just about tactics. It’s about understanding human nature. He urges rulers to observe and accept reality as it is.He offers insights not only into how politics should be done, but also how political messages should be delivered. For example, he notes that societies are always searching for better governance and tend to replace their leaders frequently. To survive, a ruler must be open to change. If circumstances shift and a prince clings to outdated strategies, they risk failure.Success, Machiavelli argues, belongs to those who adapt.This adaptability extends to political communication. Machiavelli recommends that rulers maintain close ties with their subjects, earn their respect and remain open to dialogue. He highlights the importance of public relations by pointing out subjects are content when they have a prince they can take their grievances to. A prince who watches over the people and avoids being hated is less likely to face rebellion.While Machiavelli advises that it is ideal to be both loved and feared, he concludes “it is much safer to be feared than loved”. Fear, he argues, is more reliable than love, which is conditional and easily broken.So, fear is a more controllable tool for leaders.However, he cautions that fear must not turn into hatred, as a hated ruler is vulnerable. In a world where most people are not good, a ruler must learn to stop being good – at least when the occasion demands.In modern times, Donald Trump comes to mind when we think about a ruler who chooses to inspire fear over love. But, argued international relations professor Stephen M. Walt last month, Trump is not the exemplary of Machiavelli’s model. In fact, Walt argues, he is “in many ways the poster child for How to Be a Very Bad Prince”: right now, he is widely hated (not loved, not even feared) by his subjects, for his bad economic policy and treatment of women. And yes, this makes his Republican Party vulnerable in the lead-up to the US midterm elections.Who was Machiavelli?Machiavelli was born in Florence in 1469 to parents from the old Florentine nobility. His youth coincided with the city’s rise as a major Italian power under Lorenzo de’ Medici, Il Magnifico. The grandeur of Medici rule during Lorenzo’s reign left a lasting impression on Machiavelli, and The Prince was later dedicated to Lorenzo’s grandson.After the downfall of the nobility in 1494, Machiavelli entered public service under the newly established Florentine Republic. His dealings with statesmen and soldiers during this period provided the practical insights and character studies that would later inform The Prince.The republic lasted until 1512, when the Medici returned to power and Machiavelli lost his position. Accused of involvement in a failed conspiracy against the Medici, Machiavelli was imprisoned and tortured. Pope Leo X eventually secured his release, and Machiavelli retired to a small property near Florence, where he wrote The Prince. Lorenzo di Medici. Raphael/Wikipedia From then until his death in 1527 (just weeks after the Medici were again expelled) he devoted himself to writing.In 1513, Machiavelli wrote The Prince for the instruction of the Medici, who had just regained control of Florence. I see it as a resume to get back his job: to win favour with the new Medici regime and secure his return to office. That hope was, of course, in vain.In a letter to his friend Francesco Vettori, Machiavelli described his devotion to the “little” book (The Prince), noting that it distilled lessons from his conversations with great men. It reflects Machiavelli’s political wisdom, drawn from years of experience in diplomacy and governance. His observations of contemporary figures such as the corrupt Pope Alexander VI and his illegitimate son Cesare Borgia (made a cardinal and a principal advisor to his father) inform the classic, alongside reflections on historical rulers.Machiavelli poured himself into the work, discussing the nature of principalities, the types that exist, how they are kept, and how they are lost. He believed the book would be especially useful to a new prince.The manuscript underwent many changes in titles and patrons, and dedications shifted. There’s no evidence the intended recipient ever read it, and it certainly never secured Machiavelli a position. Though plagiarised during his lifetime, The Prince was never published by Machiavelli himself, and its final text remains disputed.Reflecting on his life, in his letter to Vettori, Machiavelli wrote: And of my loyalty none could doubt, because having always kept faith I could not now learn how to break it; for he who has been faithful and honest, as I have, cannot change his nature; and my poverty is a witness to my honesty.This quote is a testament to how Machiavelli’s nature and experience shaped his writing in The Prince.The Prince and politics todayI never thought I’d get modern campaigning explainers in a book written by an ultra-realist. Yet, I find myself turning to The Prince to make sense of political dynamics in today’s world.The little book remains strikingly relevant in explaining how issues-based politics today is shaped by realist calculations. Especially during times of economic constraint, Machiavelli’s work helps explain why parties campaign the way they do – why they sing seasonal songs based on the issue that matters most.Take Australia, for example. The trajectory of the current Albanese government reflects the familiar challenges of Labor in tough economic times. Rooted in a cautious form of “thin” labourism, the government aims for short-term gains like wage increases, while avoiding bold structural reforms. Despite its talk of “values-based capitalism”, the ALP remains constrained by neoliberal frameworks. It seeks to adjust, rather than overhaul, as we see in its cautious reform of property taxation. The recent changes to taxing housing, like limiting negative gearing for residential property to new builds and reducing capital gains tax discounts, are a more significant intervention than we’ve seen in decades. But their thin labourism stops short of a wholesale challenge to the neoliberal economic settlement Labor inherited.Such limitations mirror broader tensions faced by centre-left governments around the world. In France, for instance, President Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance party has seen demands for greater public investment collide with mounting pressure for fiscal restraint.In times of economic constraint, campaigns become less about grand ideals and more about survival. Parties shape narratives, choose their battles and align their messages with dominant voter concerns: cost-of-living relief, national security, climate action. They sing seasonal songs. Both lion and foxMachiavelli’s insight that leaders must be both lion and fox — commanding strength while knowing when to deceive — plays out in every tight election race. And this might show ideological inconsistencies, when parties adopt or forego policies that differ from their ideological backbone. But it isn’t confusion. Machiavelli would call it adaptation to secure electoral victory. As he put it: “A wise ruler ought never to keep faith when by doing so it would be against his interests.” In modern Australia, major parties need to do so because voters, too, have changed. The collapse of major party loyalty, the economic squeeze and shifting class dynamics mean old battle lines no longer hold. Contemporary elections aren’t about left versus right, but who can best read the room.While The Prince is often dismissed as a manual for tyranny, it is, at its core, a study of power: how to win it, how to keep it. In an era when political campaigns are a mix of strategy, spectacle and survival, Machiavelli remains an audaciously honest classic.Intifar Chowdhury does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.