How to defeat a Machiavellian opponent who has no moral code?
I recently discovered that the project director and his henchmen of this large community in South America are Machiavellianists: https://lightprism.net/2021/07/31/the-obvious-assumption-is-not-always-the-right-one/
“Machiavellian” is a commonly known term referring to the phrase “the ends justify the means”. In other words, people subscribing to Machiavellianism have no principles, no moral code and will do everything to reach their goals, which usually is to accumulate and maintain money, power and influence. Machiavellianism is part of the “Dark Triad” of personality traits, along with psychopathy and narcissism. In my mission to assist exposing corruption in this community in South America, I am faced with the most ruthless Machiavellianists, who have been applying every known trick of their playbook against me. I will be outlining the main guiding principles of Machiavelli’s book the prince and connect it to my personal experiences with those dark actors. Finally, I will outline how I am going to use Roman military tactics to defeat them. So let us get into it.
The Prince, a Rennaissance classic
The Prince is a book written by the Italian diplomat Niccolo Machiavelli in the early 16th century. Basically, it is a guidebook for new princes and royals, containing practical strategies for their reign. The Prince was revolutionary and highly controversial when it was published, as it broke the dominant Christian doctrines at this time by stating that pragmatic truths are more important than abstract ideals. The entire book is mainly focused on one question: How to acquire and maintain political power? To gain and maintain power, Machiavelli states that “the end justifies the means”, so there is no higher moral code and in times of crisis even gruesome and despicable acts are deemed necessary. During the European wars of religion between Catholics and Protestants in the early 17th century, this book gained a diabolic reputation and was frequently blamed for leading to gruesome acts of violence and tyranny.
One of the core aspects of Machiavellianism is to always keep up the appearance of honor and virtue to the outside but be ready to abandon them and do whatever it takes when the prince’s power is threatened. Thus, Machiavellianism leads to this incoherent “two-faced” behaviors, which I have often witnessed with the project director and his people. Many writers throughout history have suggested that Machiavelli did not intend his book to be a guidebook but rather a description of the ruthless schemes of monarchs at his time so that the people could be educated and counter their schemes. After all, Machiavelli himself had suffered immensely and was even tortured by a rivaling monarch family. Nevertheless, many have taken this book at face value, as did the project director. In the following, I will present some main citations from the book and link them to the behaviors of the project director, which I have witnessed firsthand. In retrospect, it all makes a lot of sense. The following citations are from Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prince
The project director has been living up to this rule. Once he realized I was becoming a threat to his power by implementing various digital systems to create transparency in this company, he started to viciously attack me, albeit of course not directly but through his loyal soldiers. For instance, they tried to kick me out of this project by creating false rumors that I had sexually harassed several female employees. As I countered these steps and they failed, the king started to attack my team members to limit my power and sphere of influence. Eventually, two of my team members quit so the king started to feel safe again and stopped his attacks. Well, I of course knew what had been going on and was guided by spirit to ultimately help to deliver the final justice to rectify those crimes.
Moreover, it is impossible for the prince to satisfy everybody’s expectations. Inevitably, he will disappoint some of his followers. Therefore, a prince must have the means to force his supporters to keep supporting him even when they start having second thoughts, otherwise he will lose his power.
While the director tries to keep up the morale of his employees and clients, he always seems to have a strong undercurrent of fear that he will lose their support. He totally lacks an inherent trust in God and higher values so he always tries to create schemes to gain control over his subjects. For instance, the director often tried to entrap me financially by asking if I don’t want to live in a bigger house. I only have humble financial means so I decided to only build a minimalistic container house to keep my absolute freedom and independence. Moreover, the director applies this strategy frequently to his local employees who are offered large loans at low interest rates. They are bound to him for years and if they step out of line, they are fired, also losing the ability to pay back their loans. In that case, the director can seize their assets, which causes financial ruin for those employees who dared to rebel. It is an effective yet very sinister control strategy.
Machiavelli advises that a prince should carefully calculate all the wicked deeds he needs to do to secure his power, and then execute them all in one stroke. In this way, his subjects will slowly forget his cruel deeds and the prince can better align himself with his subjects. Princes who fail to do this, who hesitate in their ruthlessness, will have to “keep a knife by his side” and protect himself at all costs, as he can never trust himself amongst his subjects.
This advice is also key because the director attacked me full force with everything he had, especially once he realized that I would not stop with my efforts to create transparency. For instance, they attacked all my team members at the same time by creating similar fake stories and rumors about them being engaged in political corruption. They only succeeded in removing one of my team members but this created such demoralization that another one quit as well, once he found a better job elsewhere. The director only was mistaken in one point: I will never forget what he has done to my team members. And I have learned to patiently wait, according to divine guidance, until the time is right to help to deliver justice for those crimes. Interestingly. this advice of Machiavelli, to attack the enemy with everything in “one stroke” is contrary to traditional military Roman strategies, e.g. described by Seneca. And herein lies the key for the defeat of the Machiavellinists, by going back to the roots and using Roman military strategies as described later.
Those who are not bound to the new prince: Once again, these need to be divided into two types – those with a weak spirit (a prince can make use of them if they are of good counsel) and those who shun being bound because of their own ambition (these should be watched and feared as enemies).
This Machiavellian principle explains perfectly why the director surrounds himself with mostly weak-spirited, docile, loyal servants who praise him for every single one of his ideas and refrain from making critical statements. Needless to say that I am feared by the director as he has no control over me and he clearly knows that I operate according to timeless higher principles and I cannot be pacified financially or otherwise. Similarly, many good people have been fired in the past, many Europeans who were great minds and successful business people, but also many of the local workers here who dared to speak their mind and present their own ideas that were in contrast to what the director says.
If he cannot raise a formidable army, but must rely on defense, he must fortify his city. A well-fortified city is unlikely to be attacked, and if it is, most armies cannot endure an extended siege. However, during a siege a virtuous prince will keep the morale of his subjects high while removing all dissenters.
It really is ridiculous, as the entire management style of the director revolves around Machiavelli’s book. Through his unscrupulous acts, the director has made many enemies and always states how they “want to kill him because they can’t stop him otherwise”. As the director cannot go into the offensive, he took Machiavelli’s advice at face value by fortifying this community. His house alone has 3 armed security guards who are protecting it 24/7. Additionally, there are huge amounts of security guards at the main entrance as well as patrolling the entire property of this community. Every time the director goes on a “business trip” to the capital, he uses a convoy of 3 cars at the same time, as if he was the president of the United States. In my humble opinion, this all is a show to convince the investors in this community that we are under attack from the outside so that the people’s morale is kept high. Moreover, it is convenient to create this veneer of being under heavy political attack to remove internal dissent, which the director did by accusing one of my team members of collaborating with the external political opponent. It is all so convenient!
Machiavelli believes that a prince’s main focus should be on perfecting the art of war. He believes that by taking this profession an aspiring prince will be able to acquire a state, and will be able to maintain what he has gained.
I personally perceive Machiavelli’s book as highly limited and even like a caricature or satire, because it is almost exclusively focused on the subject of war. The director seems to be very paranoid as he always thinks about the attack, defense and control but barely thinks about other aspects such as motivation, inspiration and the creation of added value. Of course, the director has to some degree realized that the economic productivity in this company needs to be raised drastically to satisfy the demanding European clients who have paid a lot of money. However, the Machiavellian management style causes a bottleneck of productivity as it is unable to tap into the vast potential of the employees we have in this company.
Machiavelli reasons that since princes come across men who are evil, he should learn how to be equally evil himself, and use this ability or not according to necessity.
This Machiavellian principle is particularly sinister as it relates to the “eye for an eye” mentality which only creates a downward spiral of decay, destruction and despair. The project director has engaged in many evil acts by following those Machiavellian principles. For instance, he started to circulate false rumors about sexual harassment against me which is a criminal offense. And I am certainly not the only one but in the future, many people certainly will come out who have been framed in a similar way so their job contracts could be terminated, as they were starting to connect the dots of what was actually going on behind the pretty veneer. It is also one of my insights, that darkness cannot be fought by engaging in darkness. This would only cement the dark patterns as those acts are on the same energetic frequency as that which is fought. In other words, we become the demons we were supposed to fight against. The alternative way is to maintain a high vibration and divine connection by healing our traumas internally and then shining a light on the dark schemes externally – which basically is what I am doing now.
A man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good.
This echoes the previous point, as the director thinks he cannot exclusively strive after goodness or he would be defeated by his evil opponents. This goes strictly against Christian morality, which states that we should live according to higher principles for the salvation of our soul through our individual journey, regardless of what happens in the material world.
A prince may be perceived to be merciful, faithful, humane, frank, and religious, but most important is only to seem to have these qualities. A prince cannot truly have these qualities because at times it is necessary to act against them. Although a bad reputation should be avoided, it is sometimes necessary to have one. In fact, he must sometimes deliberately choose evil.
This principle is key and explains why I perceive the director and his actions in such a “two-faced” manner. He does everything to maintain a positive and benign outward appearance, while he deliberately engages in evil acts to further his own agendas. I have first-hand experience, as he always talked positively, especially in meetings with the project founders about bringing transparency into this company, but in the background, he was doing everything to sabotage, derail and block our efforts. This extreme contrast between his words and actions actually is emblematic of the extreme duality we have been experiencing on this Earth for a long time.
To pacify the Romagna, he sent in his henchman, Remirro de Orco, to commit acts of violence. When Remirro started to become hated for his actions, Borgia responded by ordering him to be “cut in two” to show the people that the cruelty was not from him, although it was.Machiavelli uses the historical example of Cesare Borgia who used cunning political maneuvers to secure his power base. Borgia blamed his henchmen for horrible acts he himself ordered and sacrificied him to pacify the populous.
This strategy has been used all the time by the director. While he himself always tries to maintain a facade of innocence, goodwill and ignorance, he instructs his loyal servants to commit heinous acts to punish and hurt his enemies and dissenters. For instance, the director instructed the people from the city office to start circulating rumors about me that I committed sexual harassment against female colleagues. Also, he instructed other of his loyal employees to harshly criticize our implementations of digital systems in order to block the process. And my efforts were so viciously attacked that I at first believed that there are only a few corrupt people at the office in the next city. Because the director always played his role of the “clueless, overworked, benign savior” perfectly. He actually is a really good actor and has no problem inventing whatever story, if it helps him to maintain his power. However, I eventually found out that many of those colleagues who attacked me actually did not want to do so but were forced to, in order to not lose their well-paid positions. The more information I collected, the clearer got the picture that everything relates back to the director himself.
In addressing the question of whether it is better to be loved or feared, Machiavelli writes, “The answer is that one would like to be both the one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is far safer to be feared than loved if you cannot be both.” As Machiavelli asserts, commitments made in peace are not always kept in adversity; however, commitments made in fear are kept out of fear. Yet, a prince must ensure that he is not feared to the point of hatred, which is very possible.
This is an important chapter, as the director also seems to strive for being feared over being loved. While he tries to create a carefully crafted image of being a selfless man of honor helping the poor and disadvantaged, he does not hesitate to strike fear into his subordinates if they step out of line. In general, I noticed that the majority of local employees are in a constant state of fear. This is because very frequently, people are fired without obvious reasons. Everyone knows that blind obedience and unconditional loyalty are more important than the actual quality of the work done. Actually, the director also seems to be in a conflict here as he knows that he needs to have good people to satisfy the high demands of European clients. What a shame that those intelligent and independent employees are so difficult to control! A culture shift is long overdue.
Fear is used as a means to ensure obedience from his subjects, and security for the prince.
This echoes the previous point and underlines the focus and fear as a means to control the employees in this company. What is interesting is that “security” is explicitly mentioned here which again demonstrates how little faith in God the director actually has. Instead, he is riddled by fear himself and needs to propagate it externally to create the illusion of control and safety. In the grand scheme of things that does not work obviously and many kings following those principles were violently removed from their positions of power despite having established those ruthless schemes of control.
A prince, therefore, should only keep his word when it suits his purposes, but do his utmost to maintain the illusion that he does keep his word and that he is reliable in that regard. Machiavelli advises the ruler to become a “great liar and deceiver”, and that men are so easy to deceive, that the ruler won’t have an issue with lying to others.
This advice is outright evil in my opinion and the director is taking it literally. Many times, he has assured me personally of something, e.g. that I have a say in the hiring process of my team members in this company, only to later negate those statements or accusing me of having misunderstood what he said. I can’t even count the number of lies I have heard from the director and as my mission progressed, I decided to do as much as possible in a written form. For example, I documented my own progress regularly and also tried to obtain written reassurance from several of the director’s loyal servants. The more this mission progressed, the more obvious the lies of the director became. Instead of making a clear cut and admitting to his lies, he just creates more and more of them but as he does that the lies are becoming more obvious. Sometimes his statements are even becoming so ridiculous that even the project founders are starting to notice those grave inconsistencies. Moreover, Machiavelli is wrong about another point: Not all men are easy to deceive. Especially if the lies go on over a long period of time, they accumulate and those engaging in this dishonorable behavior will only expose themselves eventually, like a spider that becomes trapped in its own web of lies.
Machiavelli observes that the majority of men are content as long as they are not deprived of their property and women, and only a minority of men are ambitious enough to be a concern.
Apparently, the director also believes that most men are pacified if they have access to the simple pleasures of life, e.g. money and women. This certainly is not the case, as I strive for higher virtues of truth, honor and justice. That said, there are also many of the local workers who are tired of those grave injustices but who are still being controlled through financial means. Once, the house of cards starts to collapse, many will also come forward with the truth.
it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because fortune is a woman; and it is necessary, if one wants to hold her down, to beat her and strike her down.
The director also follows this advice as he often takes the initiative on grand prestigious undertakings in a very impulsive manner. Furthermore, the negative condescending viewpoint about women is another aspect to be considered here.
If a prince is overly generous to his subjects, Machiavelli asserts he will not be appreciated, and will only cause greed for more. Additionally, being overly generous is not economical, because eventually all resources will be exhausted.
Several authors criticized Machiavelli, but also followed him in many ways. They accepted the need for a prince to be concerned with reputation, and even a need for cunning and deceit, but compared to Machiavelli, and like later modernist writers, they emphasized economic progress much more than the riskier ventures of war.Giovanni Botero, Justus Lipsius, Carlo Scribani, Adam Contzen, Pedro de Ribadeneira, and Diego de Saavedra Fajardo.
These passages mirror the severely limited economic comprehension of the director who thinks that everything is a “zero-sum game”. In other words, the economic pie is limited and everything is about its distribution, i.e. they need to fight hard to gain resources that are taken from someone else. However, it totally misses the point that when investing in innovation and entrepreneurship, the economic output can be drastically increased so that there are more resources for everyone. Put differently, we don’t really need to fight so much over the pieces of the economic pie when we can actually drastically grow its size. I am convinced that we will be able to create unprecedented levels of innovation and economic growth in this community in the future when those restrictive Machiavellian structures are torn down – which now is only a matter of time.
Machiavellianism refers to a psychological trait concept where individuals behave in a cold and duplicitous manner. […] The presence of Machiavellianism in an organisation has been positively correlated with counterproductive workplace behaviour.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavellianism_in_the_workplace
This is another interesting analysis of how Machiavellianists behave in workplace situations. It has commonly been observed that they tend to create duplicitous structures according to their own perceived agendas, which lie in stark contrast to the overall goals of the company. As a result, this creates counterproductive effects which overall harm the long-term productivity of a company. It is bad enough if there is a Machiavellian employee in a lower position but now imagine what is done if he is in the leading position of the company! This explains how the director has created a “company inside the company” which is gravely opposed to the official goals of the company as set by their founders. Nevertheless, immense effort is invested into creating the illusion that the company works as desired by the founders. This scheme can only exist for a limited time and will eventually collapse.
A rennaissance of Roman military tactics
So how can a Machiavellian, who is as cunning and shrewd as the director, be defeated? I have been following my higher guidance and was eventually lead to this important mission of exposing the project director’s corruption by making his dark schemes visible to the founders. I always knew that I should not step down to their level. I needed to walk a higher path, always maintaining my higher principles of truth, honor and virtue. A couple of weeks back, I was watching the movie “The Gladiator” with Russell Crowe. The movie describes the fate of the Roman General Maximus, who led the Roman army against the Germanic tribes under the famous emperor Marcus Aurelius. Especially the first battle scene resonated intensely for various reasons. Firstly, I felt that the landscape of the battle against the German tribes was strangely familiar. I realized this historic battle happened in my home region of Hessen, which is also connected to the important Rennaissance period, in which current events in this community are a replay of.
In this battle, general Maximus follows the typical Roman military tactics of first bombarding the enemy with heavy artillery fire. As the infantry is moving forward towards the enemy lines, the general himself is leading a cavalry charge to attack the enemy army from behind. This strategy was highly successful as the initial bombardment would wear out the enemy forces and ultimately the surprising cavalry charge totally overwhelm them. Hence, even superior forces could be defeated this way and the Roman armies achieved many decisive victories applying this tactic. As I saw this scene, I realized that I needed to apply the same tactics to defeat the Machiavellianists. Initially, we would continuously attack them to wear them out, while I still maintain my distance. Meanwhile, I would be preparing a surprise attack to directly strike them when they least expect it.
As General Maximus holds a speech to his Roman cavalry knights, he says something along the lines of “3 weeks from now I will be harvesting my crops”. I immediately knew that this timeline applies to me. In other words, for 3 weeks I would be slowly yet continuously attacking the Machiavallianists from a distance but then directly strike when the time has come.
I am already within the 3-week time frame now. I am guided to continually attack the Machiavellian forces by creating pressure through various different means. Moreover, my higher guidance always has my back, as I receive strong intuitions of what their next moves are. Hence, I can use their attacks to counter them and exposing their lies more and more. At some point, I will launch a decisive attack that will break the enemy lines and will make them scatter and turn on each other. It is so fascinating to be part of this whole experience and we are close to the final battle.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.Ephesians 6:12, KJV
Finally, I want to underline the fact that the director is not evil per sé. Deep down, he is a noble soul who is through unfortunate circumstances trapped in a swamp of his traumas and fears so that he can be controlled by dark forces. As a matter of fact, I do have a subtle intuition of what type of lower entity attachment I am dealing with at this point. Something has taken hold of the director’s soul, a really powerful dark entity represented by the Machiavellian consciousness. It is like a parasite that controls the host to extract his life force, however in this case not only of the director but everyone who is suffering under his Machiavellian reign. It is a monumental challenge but I have undergone a lot of training in many lifetimes to be ready for this and above all, there is sheer endless support for us in the higher realms.