Machiavelli vs. Erasmus Essay

Machiavelli vs. ErasmusI believe that some(prenominal) of these tidy sums, to a certain extent and in certain situations, ar passive relevant today. With some people, the parts of the population that seek single to make water in their lives, and non contri excepte to the better workforcet of society, I would say that the Machiavellian get along would be of better use. Because he is right, a pot of men are ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, ward offers of dangers and eager to gain. With these kinds of people, they will try to take what they can without project for who they crush, so the only way to keep them in check is their aid of the penalizations they might receive. We obviously befoolt have to worry rough them killing someone for political reasons like in the times when The Prince was written, but I would say that seizure of property is still a penalisation used today.That is the first thing people go for when seeking punishment or reparations money, possessions or p roperty. I speak up distinguish of country, not inevitably the person running it is the best way to get devotion from people. So I disagree that those people who follow out of love are less reliable. Especi whollyy right now, as a member of the build up forces, I can speak for myself a many of my comrades that we dont agree with most, if anything, our current leader says or does. exclusively we follow his orders anyway, because we love this country, and that is greater than any personal reason for not following our President. If anyone correct tried to use the fear near, they would never even get elected. That is wherefore they have propaganda and the occasional commercial telling all the good plant they do, not saying who they punished for not agreeing with them. So maybe in a country where democracy doesnt decide the leader, Machiavellis approach might be used, but in ours, I would say only for small portions of the population would it be useful.I think Erasmuss ruling w ould be more accepted in todays world. We all know some politicians dont follow a lot of the things he lists a good ruler should do. I dont agree with him saying that taking an injury and losing a little of the conglomerate might be a better choice. Not taking those injuries, and showing the world that we are a super power and wont take things laying down is the best way to avoid distress in the long run. But his views on what a leader should be, and how he should treat the citizens of his nation Icompletely agree with. The leader should coiffe the good of the people before his own welfare. But I dont think that war brings all the misfortunes of state, sometimes it is necessary to go to war with those who would bring those misfortunes.I believe that liberals fall under Erasmuss category with just a little of Machiavelli, with conservatives using some of both. sound judgement from the two views, I would say that the liberals follow more closely to Erasmus because of his approach to peace. Give a little pride and take a hit, avoid war at all costs. These are approaches that, in my opinion, the most new-made liberal presidents weve had have used. While the conservatives hit right back and went to war. The war might have caused many misfortunes since then, but who knows what might have happened to us if we had done nothing? We used the fear of punishment approach, and I think it worked just fine.So in conclusion, I think Erasmuss view is the better approach on how to view and treat the citizens of a nation. But there are some times when Machiavellis approach is necessary, if not to your citizens, then to those who would abuse them.