Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Bill Brantley
December 19, 2025

For over a hundred years Machiavelli’s name has been associated with manipulation, dominant leadership and high-level political power. In contemporary American thinking (particularly among public administrators) a “Machiavellian” leader is someone to be wary of rather than admired. However, political theorist John P. McCormick contends that this common image overlooks what Machiavelli truly cared about: safeguarding freedom by giving regular people the power to counter unchecked elites.
McCormick’s books Machiavellian Democracy (2011) and The People’s Princes: Machiavelli, Leadership, and Liberty (2024) reinterpret Machiavelli as an advocate for “popular republicanism” rather than ruthless rulers. This perspective offers a new way to consider post-Trump U.S. governance amid declining trust and increasing polarization.
Rethinking Machiavelli: Not Elite Power but Popular Oversight
McCormick’s main point is that Machiavelli was not crafting political strategies for clever rulers or the elite. Rather, his works, especially the Discourses on Livy, reveal his distrust of wealthy elites who use political systems to serve their own interests.
In Machiavellian Democracy, McCormick argues that Machiavelli saw ordinary people as better protectors of liberty than elites who sought power. To address this, Machiavelli supported giving citizens real oversight over politicians through certain institutions:
McCormick refers to these as “anti-oligarchic institutions,” structures that encourage participation and restrain those who might threaten republican government. Contrary to common perceptions, this Machiavelli values ordinary people over elites and aims to ensure accountability within the republic.
Leadership Through Constraint: The Lessons of The People’s Princes
McCormick expands his reinterpretation in The People’s Princes concentrating on Machiavelli’s ideas about leadership. He suggests that Machiavelli did not favor strong leaders simply for their own sake. Rather, Machiavelli supported “princes” only if they took responsibility for safeguarding liberty by restraining elite factions. A “people’s prince” is defined as a leader who:
This leadership style is activist but not authoritarian. It uses authority to rebuild and enhance the civic power of citizens. McCormick’s framework provides a valuable perspective in the American setting by distinguishing between an executive who concentrates power for personal or partisan advantage and one who seeks to bolster democratic accountability even if this restricts the executive’s own influence.
Why Machiavellian Democracy Matters Now
The current political climate after Trump faces three key issues: widespread distrust of federal institutions, intense partisan divides and the perceived disconnect between administrative elites and the public. McCormick’s Machiavelli provides strategies to address each problem.
Rebuilding Trust through Anti-Oligarchic Oversight
Machiavelli’s idea of citizen oversight over elites is echoed today in citizens’ panels, participatory budgeting and review boards. To rebuild trust the federal government could:
These groups would enhance not replace professional expertise by boosting legitimacy and accountability.
Creating Systems that Resist Executive Overreach
McCormick’s People’s Princes shows Machiavelli valued strong leaders only when they upheld republican freedom. Post-Trump reforms should focus on constitutional purpose not just presidential power. A Machiavellian approach supports:
These measures prioritize republican values over personal control.
Revitalizing Civic Participation and Public Service
Machiavellian democracy depends on citizens actively invested in governance. This principle supports current federal workforce reforms focused on transparency, public participation, representativeness and leadership in participatory governance. According to McCormick, Machiavelli’s ideas provide a philosophical basis for these changes: effective government requires engaged citizens rather than passive subjects.
Toward a Post-Trump Federal Republic
McCormick’s books aim to highlight Machiavelli’s commitment to liberty and popular empowerment, portraying him as a defender against oligarchic control rather than an advocate for power politics. This perspective offers public administrators guidance on building a more resilient, participatory and accountable federal system. McCormick shows that Machiavelli provided much of the framework; what remains is the political will to trust the people.
Author: Dr. Bill Brantley is the President and Chief Learning Officer for BAS2A, an instructional design consultancy for state and local governments. He also teaches at the University of Louisville and the University of Maryland. His opinions are his own and do not reflect those of his employers.
Follow Us!