Compare And Contrast Julius Caesar And Alexander The Great

Words: 773
Pages: 4

Some rulers believe being a monarch you should be feared such as how Machiavelli says, ”If a ruler wants to survive he must learn to stop being good.” This shows that he believes ruling through fear is more effective than being a good person and using love as your ruling method. These rulers were military rulers who tried to take over as much land to gain power and rule many empires as possible and tried to be able to survive by being feared by many of their people and their enemies. Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great show they are worthy of ruling by taking over much of their area and they were strong military leaders. Both of these rulers killed many people and slaughtered towns and they both didn't leave many survivors. These two rulers, Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan show that being feared is better than being loved because of how many people hated them …show more content…
According to The Prince: Part III, ”It is much safer to be feared than loved.” This acts as evidence showing that Machiavelli believes if you are not able to be loved and feared at the same time it would be better to be feared because it has an advantage to the ruler. Two rulers that prove Machiavelli’s claim are Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great are two monarchs who knew it is better to be feared than loved because they knew if they let their guard down they would have been overthrown and as they showed fear they were not someone to double-cross.Two rulers that prove Machiavelli’s claim are Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great are two monarchs who knew it is better to be feared than loved because they knew if they let their guard down they would have been overthrown and as they showed fear they were not someone to