Need help with my writing homework on Machiavelli and Morality. Write a 1250 word paper answering;  .
. . . . . . . . . . . Machiavelli dedicated the first half of the book to assess different kinds of principalities, with examples drawn from classical and modern history to expose political strategies that worked for the rulers. In the then political culture, he contends that the Prince can only rule over hereditary principalities when he conquers particular principalities of interest or sets up a colony in that territory. This is arguably a case of pure lack of morality on the ruler’s part as he or she would deny the people of the conquered territory of their hard-earned political freedom.
. . . . . . . . . . . As Berlin (1) noted, Machiavelli arguably advocates for expanding the territory to another principality in his advice that the Prince must use force and or violence to remove the culture and institutions of influence which the previous Prince depended on in that principality. He adds that the amoral, violent way is the only deterrent to a rebellion that might be staged by the remaining elements. Machiavelli proceeds to cite the successes of the Romans as the fruits of this conquest strategy. By failing to criticize the willingness to annex new territories via conquest and his reference to the confrontation that follows such annexations as very normal and ordinary, Machiavelli arguably advocates for the amoral political world.  .
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
. . . . . . . . . . . To demonstrate his point, he particularly looks at Alexander the Great positively as he extends the praise to his foot soldiers whose support enabled him to control the principalities they annexed (Berlin 1). And in justifying the degree of amoral ways of governance, most probably to remain well reasoned, he differentiates between ruling people who had been under the control of a dictator and those who had been previously freer and more autonomous. Machiavelli argues that populations who had been subject to the adversities of absolute power would be more difficult to turn towards a new center of influence. Still, upon their conquering, their loyalty would be guaranteed by the same system of governance established by the previous rulers.