Commoners have been able to rise to power an d higher status by simply committing themselves to the art of war, while the nobility w ho have ignored this art have lost power and have been reduced to commoners. (? ) Toni: If you are focused only on war, do you not believe that you may bring ruin to your name and our country instead? Is following the art of military matters so passionately a good example to lead for these citizens? Focusing on the military affairs of our country would only strengthen my rule and protect our country because what country would feel safe under a king who cannot d fend himself?
And what soldier will obey a leader who does not understand military matters himself? There would be no trust between either party and a king who does not have the trust and support of h is citizens will surely bring the end of his country. Continuing on what you were saying a disarmed prince would make you dish seed because you are not prepared to protect your country. However, disagree WI the you on strictly focusing on war. If this is all you think about then how would you focus on the affairs w thin your own country? You become king, where would your priorities lie? What would you first move to fix or improve? I would concentrate much of my effort to ensure our military is properly trait Ned, in mindset and physique. Much of military matters lie in the mind, this is why it’s seen to be an affair of strategy. Would also ensure that l, my men, and even those who plan on join Eng our military devote much time to learn our country’s terrain to properly defend it in times where we must defend ourselves, but also in times when we are attacking; we are prepared for any terrain.
I woo old ensure that we are well versed in the histories and the actions of many of the great men of history and we learn from their accomplishments and mistakes. This strategy is reasonable, as well as it is admirable to train alongside your m en. This is what I plan to put into action if chosen to be king. I would lead by example, SSH owing that am used to hardships by training myself through hunting and studying the surrounding a rear to be knowledgeable in the world’s terrain. Thank you. We will now move onto the topic “For which men are praised or bal named. In the matter of procedures in which a prince must deal with his subjects and friends, do you me it wise to structure a rule based on theoretical ideals or more practical ones? “Many writers have imagined for themselves republics and principalities that have never been seen nor known to exist in reality.. ” Why this is is because it was built up on a way on how men should live their lives versus how they actually live it. Men continuously fall SSH rot of the conventional standards of morality. With that being said it is better to create a rule based o n how the world really is and the way politics work.
The ruler can change what defines reality. If reality is cruelty, then the king m SST simply bring in kindness and goodness; it may be slow, but a good king would work h radar to ensure that kindness will be seen in the country in the end. How do you suggest then how a leader can maintain his position in a world fill deed with rulers with little morals? One must learn how not to be good. If one rules on good virtues alone, he will lose his state. A princes’ primary job is to protect the state and that is why it is nesses ray for him to use to his advantage his bad characteristics to meet this need.
I disagree. I believe a rule based on good and good intentions would bring for better country. If the king were to bring good into his rule, then the country would re fleet that good. Lie: So are you claiming that a good leader is weak and does not exist? There is no such thing as a “good leader” because possessing all good attribute sees and always being on ones best behavior is unrealistic. Instead a prince must know when to be flaunting his praiseworthy attributes while at the same time using his vices sparingly. Both characteristics good or bad can either lose the state for him or save it.
It is how he uses them that ma ekes the difference. . Danville Again, I must disagree. A good leader is not something that is based off of all good qualities, but on the general goodness of his person, as well as the good that he does for his state. With that said, agree with your opinion how the prince carries these characteristic s that make the difference in how he rules. That’s a interesting point of view. Generosity and miserliness is covered next. (? ) Julie: Would you consider it best the the country to be a generous or greedy leader when it comes to taxes?
Well, if one is generous and lenient on tax the armies will suffer by not having efficient funds needed to support them. King of France was able to wage many wars without increasing taxes on his us objects. “Only the spending of your own is what harms you” It is sometimes best to 10 toting, sacking and ransom from your fallen enemies to support ones kingdom. For this can be SE en as both generous for his kingdom but cruel to your defeated foes. Tom: Which of these aspects makes for a better Prince? “We have no seen great things done in our time except by those who have be en considered mean; the rest have failed. Meaning a king has to be mean and greedy to get what he wants and do hat is best for his country by taking more land and expanding. If a Prince wishes to be seen as generous to his men he must give them lavish displays. This will only be possible by excessive taxing. This will make him hated and be come impoverish. A prince must not fear being called a miser, for with him he will be seen as gene Ross once he is able to make his income sufficient and can defend himself and anyone who makes w AR against him. If liberality is so important is it possible that being too mean can lead to your downfall?
It is liberality that makes soldiers follow their leader into battle. But it is liberal itty that can lead to being hated and despised by his people which can lead to a ruler’s do windfall. One must be cautious and have an equal balance of generosity and liberality to be consider deed a good ruler. “There is nothing that uses itself up faster than generosity… You become tithe r poor or despised” Both generosity and miserliness if unbalanced can be the downfall. Thank you. Now for your thoughts on cruelty and mercy and whether it is beet retro be loved. As a ruling figure, which do you believe is better, to be loved, or to be feared
Well, a leader figure should wanton be both loved and feared, however, its quite impossible to be both loved and feared. Since this is so, I believed it is safer to be feared because relying on the love of others will put you at risk when times get tough. They WI II support you when they feel safe, but when they feel endangered they will leave you.