A Machiavellian ruler would not care too much for his subjects. He would exactly do his best to keep a good written report and be on good graces with his people. From this it can be inferred that on that point is no specific system or style of living. It would just about likely have a lot of capitalist ideas since it is a monarchy. On the other hand, Utopia relies on the unity and contribution of the citizen. thither are specific rules on the everyday lives of the people. For example, the citizens all put up the same style of modest clothing and there was a lack of social ranking. Much thought would be disposed in every aspect of their lives, from food to marriage to impertinent relations. In other words, in Utopia, the citizens, not the ruler, are the around influential part of the state.

Machiavelli made the priorities of a prince very sporting: to stabilize and expand the empire. Through either moral or immoral means, a prince must acquire the most power. He may be deceitful or untrustworthy as long as he played his cards right. His state would have a lot of underlying political turmoil, whereas Utopia would represent community growth and emphasis on moral behavior. utopian people would be very hardworking and educated. Their state would rivet on how to deal with human nature. Utopia has no desire for wealthiness or war; it only wishes to be effective and civilized. Overall, a Machiavellian prince is able to cater to greed whereas a Utopian leader yearns for moral justice.
It goes...If you want to get a dear essay, order it on our website: Orderessay
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.