Special Thanks to Peter W. Schramm for his article: The Great Machiavellian Deed - Reconsideration of Frederick II's Invasion of Silesia.
Philosopher
Introduction
There is a common misconception concerning philosopher kings that they are people blinded with theory, interested only in book-knowledge, and are unable to be men of action. A true man of action must be a thinking man, or else he is perpetually busy, but going nowhere. It is difficult, however, to visualize a philosopher king in action, however. Therefore, using the analysis from Mr. Schramm for his fine article, this article will look briefly at how Frederick II of Prussia was a successful philosopher king, as well as what lessons we can learn today from his actions to ensure the safety and well being of his people, the object of all leaders.
Biblical Lessons
Before we look specifically at Frederick II's action to ensure the well-being of Prussia, it would be useful to look in general at lessons from the bible that are applicable to all people in all times concerning leadership. If someone is a truly wise philosopher king, they will have the interests of their people at heart. First, let us look at scriptures that detail the responsibilities of leaders, and then we will look at some of the sacrifices those leaders had to undergo in order to be good leaders, looking at the life of David as an example, since he was a political leader after God's own heart.
The Bible details very specific instruction as to what is required, permitted, and not allowed for leaders if they wish to follow God's instructions. However, many leaders would like to place themselves above where God places them. This is idolatry, and it is tyranny, and the Bible forbids it. First, the Bible commands service of its leaders, not management, not leadership, but service. This is important to distinguish. The point is sufficiently obvious and important to demand full length treatment, but that will be given elsewhere. The case will only be briefly defined here. Second, leaders are forbidden from placing themselves above those they serve. Many leaders, religious and political, forget this and would seek to place themselves above humanity. Whether this person is a pope, a president, or a pastor general, is irrelevant. The Bible is clear and unmistakable.
First, the Bible commands those who would lead to serve. Jesus Christ Himself did not come to be served, but to serve (see Matthew 20:28). If Christ did not come to be served, no human leader can rightfully place themselves above others. After all, Matthew 20:25-27 points out very clearly: "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to be great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave." How many people leading anything would want to be a slave to those they lead? But that is what a true philosopher king does, serve the interests of the people rather than his own. Christians are to submit to one another (see Ephesians 5:21), which means that ministers submit to members and members submit to ministers. Everyone in the body of Christ is accountable to everyone else to make sure everyone is performing their function correctly. There is no room for pride, for leaders, just like everyone else, must esteem others above themselves, regardless of what position they have. We are accountable to those whom we serve. This is true in religious organizations, as it is true politically. The same truth is true in both worlds, even if this may be difficult to realize.
We have already seen that the Bible forbids leaders from viewing themselves too highly. While this is readily agreed to in the general sense, it is often neglected in particulars. Fortunately, Deuteronomy 17:14-20 sets some very strict standards concerning kings: "When you come to the land which Lord your God is giving you, and possess it and dwell in it, and say, 'I will set a king over me like all the nations that are around me,' you shall surely set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses [note: not one who would set himself as king]; one from among your brethren you shall set as king over you; you may not set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother.
But he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, for the Lord has said to you, 'You shall not return that way again.' Neither shall he multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away; nor shall he greatly multiply silver and gold for himself. Also it shall be, when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write for himself a copy of this law in a book, from the one before the priests, the Levites. And it shall be with him, and he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God and be careful to observe all the words of this law and these statues, that his heart may not be lifted above his brethren, that he may not turn aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left, and that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children in the midst of Israel." To summarize this passage, a leader should be raised up from among the people (not from outside), he shouldn't multiply wealth for himself (cars, jets, houses), he should keep the law in mind constantly, and he is forbidden from considering himself above those he serves. Sounds a lot more like service and sacrifice than management to me.
Frederick II As A Philosopher King
Frederick II has earned in many eyes lasting censure for supposedly betraying his philosophical and humanitarian princely life for a Machiavellian career as the King of Prussia. In this section I will look first at his princely life, and his problems with his father in particular. Then I will look at his actions as the King of Prussia, in particular his seizure of Silesia, and finally I will analyze his actions as a philosopher king for the benefit of his people. This will demonstrate, briefly, that Frederick II acted in the best interests of his people, which is the expectation of a philosopher king, and did not act out of callous disregard for his people as is often supposed.
in Our blog