What some may believe to be the acts of a malicious ruler are, in fact, in the best interest of the state. Machiavelli states that a prince should regard himself miserly, so his people may believe that he is investing in the commonwealth. Liberality will lead to increased taxes to support a prince’s lavish spending. Therefore, a lavishly spending prince will only be hated and untrusted by his people, which will lead turmoil. In addition, a prince that strays from generosity will be regarded as a miser.
Bartolome de las Casas is used by Zinn for many of the sources of the cruelty against the natives, but even Zinn admits that "his figures are exaggerations"(). However, Zinn still puts Bartolome under much less criticism than Columbus even though the priest did his share in being cruel to natives; this was most likely because he wanted to make the point that Columbus should not be so heroized. Overall, the monarchy of Europe is truly to blame for sending the greediest men with orders only to extract wealth from the New World. Whether or not America should celebrate Columbus Day is a highly debatable topic, but it should not really be celebrated or called after a relatively cruel man. Columbus just happened to be in charge of the right ship with a gamble that turned out to make him extremely successful, but he did not have anything, besides good seamanship to make him any more exciting than the average
“Haha” I said after I had tricked my younger brother. “You are so gullible!” still thinking back to my great idea which had been so successful. My Brother did not see through my tricky plans, just like Fortunato could not see through Montresor 's plans of Murder, in Edgar Allen Poe’s The Cask of Amontillado. Montressor used a couple different aspects to keep his plan away from Fortunato’s eyes. Fortunato’s pride, and the setting of the catacombs are two ways Montresor masked his plans for revenge from Fortunato.
Brutus’ ideologies, however though honorable, are rigid. Being this calculation is what leaves him prone to being manipulated by Cassius. The logical and abstract meaning that he attaches to Caesar’s assassination blocks him from seeing the need to examine the political maneuvering that is used to justify the murder. In contrast to Brutus, Antony proves to be the most adaptable of all the characters. Although he becomes powerful through offering himself to honor Caesar’s will and give the citizens their money he doesn’t tie himself to this ethical limitation.
Ironically enough, the dream goes against Raskolnikov’s initial belief that superior and extraordinary men don’t need order or law. A world full of these men results in total anarchy. Raskolnikov, through this dream which points out the flaw of his belief, realizes that he is not a nihilist. He steps out of his blind belief that left him with more harm than good. Character development in Crime and Punishment is essential to follow Raskolnikov’s progression of ideas and conflict regarding the murder he committed.
Neoliberalistic logic towards Jean Valjean looks only at what he did, not at what makes him act that way. What is worse, its logic has tendency to treat people like Jean Valijean as potential criminals even though they do not steal bread. Neoliberalism has its own reason to punish people like Jean Valjean that way: if the government increases social welfare budget to assist low-income group, the policy will help them to stay idle without looking for a job to help themselves. Neoliberalists think that social welfare systems will end up creating moral hazard among people in general. Accordingly, they attribute social evil to the social welfare
The reader quickly forgets about that position once they meet General Zaroff. Although he can process that human beings have feelings, that doesn’t stop him from committing violence against them. Adding a villain in the story makes the plot summary more memorable and interesting; it also creates a thought-provoking story. In the end, Rainsford’s assumption is accurate; Zaroff is indeed a psychopath, labeling him conceited, unstable, selfish, pretentious and a swindler. Overall, just because someone owns an island and wears nice clothes doesn’t make him or her a good person; how someone acts and treats others is the way to tell the type of person he or she
Making a statement of wanting attention does not describe a soldier that has the interest of everyone, instead it shows how selfish he could be. Selfish in the way that he believed that he could take that war and make movie scenes out of it. Giving the impression as if he does not see the gravitate of how that one dreaming mistake can have on someone’s
That even though the robbers were criminals, leaving them behind to die would make him no better than murders. Huck Finn was able to make ethical choices through his conscience instead of through God’s guide. Another example of making moral decisions without religion is shown through Jim’s actions. Jim ,an uneducated runaway slave, relies on his superstitions rather than religion to make judgements. When Huck and Jim came across a flooded house with a dead man laying on the floor, Jim was quick to “throw some old rags over him to prevent Huck from seeing the “gashly” looking dead man (50).
Despite the three students’ propensity to lie, cheat, and fly under the radar of the law, based on Grisham’s enthralling storyline and character development, you still feel this compulsion to root for their success. Without reading The Rooster Bar, the actions of Matt, Todd, and Lola may seem reprehensible at the onset, but Grisham creates a Robin Hood-esque dilemma. It is illegal, not to mention unethical, to pull a fast one over corporations, but you have to imagine that it would feel hella good along the way. The three friends commit illegal acts, but they do so for the sake of rebellion against Foggy Bottom. Matt, Todd, and Zola feel suffocated by the debt and the control corporate giants hold over their future, an idea many Americans can relate to some extent with.
Huck and Jim encountered a deteriorating floating house drifting down the river; due to curiosity, they explored it. Inside, the pair located a decomposing dead body which Jim did not permit Huck to see, do to it being “‘too gashly’” (Twain 38). However, Jim lied about the apparent gruesome body. The body was Huck’s biological father and Jim prevented him from seeing the traumatic scene. Jim lied to Huck, a un-Christly action, but he had the intention of preserving Huck’s childhood.
Mark Twain’s view of human nature to be naturally greedy is evident through the actions of the king, for the reason being he wanted to deprive the true recipients of all the inheritance of the wilk’s family, and keep it all to himself as well with the duke. In addition, the king impertinently states to the duke that if they let the extremely valuable land alone and deny selling it they would of been ignoramus for taking such action. Thus, reveals Twain’s view on human nature of being greedy, due to the fact that the king doesn’t show concern for the welfare of the true recipients of the inheritance, and only a desire to obtain more wealth and benefit