The middle classes hatred for Austrian rule was growing and people didn't understand why people of the same culture should be divided and ruled by foreign monarchies. Nationalists wanted a republic rather than a monarch. Why should they be subjects rather than citizens of an independent state? Liberals believed Italy should be ruled by a constitutional monarchy, where the monarch had less power. They didn't trust the current monarchies or republicans.
He then spoke of how the use of foreign soldiers usually leads to the destruction of the leader. Machiavelli describes two different types of mercenaries: those who abandon their posts during ba... ... middle of paper ... ...arts of his kingdom or the weakening of other regions due to lack of leadership. The difference in the cultures and lifestyles presented difficulties in maintaining control over conquered lands. Local factors and circumstances of a land conquered by a prince or king were very important in determining the success of the ruler. According to Niccolo Machiavelli two of the most important local factors for a foreign ruler to consider when trying to maintain power are the employment of loyal, native troops and the consideration of cultural differences.
Simnel managed to build up a decent army of Irish and German soldiers, but was defeated in 1487 by Henry's troops. Simnel may have been defeated but the fact that he had gained so much support was what worried Henry the most. He became suspicious of ... ... middle of paper ... ...y to show his power. He didn't go to war often, for the sake of his country, but when he did he put in a lot of effort to show that England was not an easy country to defeat. He also helped to settle problems between other countries e.g.
However, this concept of leadership neglects the fact that the person that holds the most power above others will not inevitably do what is right or necessary for his people. Machiavelli notoriously professed that if great rulers want to keep their power, they must learn how "not to be good". In today’s world, Niccolo Machiavelli’s teachings on how one must lead would not work because the world is not as chaotic as it was in his time. Italy, d... ... middle of paper ... ...to have little to nothing in common but beneath the surface, they share one major characteristic: patience. The Tao teaches that if a leader is, “patient with both friends and enemies, they accord with the way things are“(Tzu).
He did not accomplish his goal, although he tried to in his writings, specifically in one of his books called “The Prince”. In this book, Machiavelli tried to call for a hero who could save Italy and unify it. But Italy, back then, was facing problems. Italy had to do a wise decision, whether to unify or to remain in the political structure it was in. If Italy remained in the same political structure then it would suffer from a huge economic and cultural loss, but if Italy decided to unify and become a whole country, then it would become the most important country in the modern world.
The people of Italy felt that the government had not delivered what they had promised. D'annunzio who had initially supported the war marched into the city of Fiume and took charge in declaration of Nationalism in Italy. The government did nothing to suppress this showing their weakness in failing to sort out Italy's problem at this time, eg the economy and social state of the country. Economically Italy was hit very badly by WW1, they had relied on foreign loans to finance their war effort and once the war was over Italy as well as the rest of Europe was now in state of economic ... ... middle of paper ... ...eventual march on Rome. However the march was not necessary as the King invited Mussolini to form a government, partly to stop the threat of Civil war but also as he told a confident at the time, he wished 'To save a cabinet of poltroons and that in Mussolini he had a Prime Minister who was really a man of purpose who will last some time and has the will to act and act well'.
The two times the Confederates attacked the North at Antietam and Gettysburg, the results were catastrophic because of a lack of strategy. An offensive plan of war does not necessarily mean charging right at an opponent, who in this case had more than three times the number of men as the Confederates. Rather, an effective form of offense would be to attack northern factories, farms, and cities. This would damage the Union’s amount of provisions and hurt the people’s desire to support the war effort. The South also needed to be more aggressive politically.
The Austrian chancellor Metternich had a totally negative and reactionary approach meaning that he was strongly opposed to nationalism and h... ... middle of paper ... ... domination over the Italian peninsula was definitely the main obstacle to the unification of Italy in the period 1815-1849. Although the other factors were important in ensuring that the overall effort of the revolutionaries was more united and in turn greater, it was always clear that without the military capabilities and resources of the Austrians there was no way that the revolutionaries could be successful. The overall effort for a united Italy was weak in many different ways and although the lack of a universal leader was definitely the next single most important factor after Austrian power it was only an element to a certain extent. Therefore without Austrian intervention there would have been more liberal provisional governments which would have had a greater chance of working together to form a united Italy.
Fascism is such a unique form of government, and it needs the right conditions to form. Unfortunately, for many countries, and Italy specifically, fascism typically begins to grow after the previous political system failed. The political systems fail during or after the loss of a war, resulting in serious turmoil and corruption throughout the country, even with a powerful, charismatic leader trying to save the country. The Italian political system was extremely flawed because the ideals of fascism were lost as Benito Mussolini’s charisma and appeal took the forefront. The people thought they had power when they actually had no influence, the country was deeply divided politically and socially, and the people turned fascism into Mussolinism
Machiavelli’s explanations throughout the book easily sway one into believing that he is supporting violence and aggression as crucial to maintaining power. He discusses how violence can be essential to maintaining power, but his accounts are nearly always supported with exceptional reasoning. When leading others, it is all about balance and acting accordingly when chastising individuals. When people dislike or disrespect the individual overseeing them, all control is lost. Machiavelli saw aggression and war as essential to the success of any leadership, and necessary to gain reverence.