The present article suggests we should not see any contradiction between the politics
adopted bv Frederick the Great following the conquest of Silesia and his Anti-Machiavel.
which contained a decidedly negative outlook on Machiavelli, nor should we deem
Frederick’s claim to Enlightenment to conflict with his Machtpolitik. Frederick's
Enlightenment is clearlv sui generis, consisting in nothing but a radically pragmatic
rationalism. What results from a similar position is a philosophical worldview based upon
an ethics which is at the same time naturalistic and social. Frederick aims at reconciling
self-love with the quest for the common good, sacrificing the former to the latter in case
they should be incompatible with one another. Therefore Machiavelli is denounced as a
moral philosopher, who lets the prince’s private interest prevail over that of the State.
Expansionism, necessarv to the State’s growth, is hence a moral and political duty of the
sovereign. The king’s duties exceed those of private individuals. Not onlv carrying out
wars, but also conquering and breaking pacts can have a moral value, as long as the
sovereign is inspired by the common good and not bv Machiavelli's false moralitv.
