A person who is described as Machiavellian is someone who

2 answers:

5 0

A person who is described as Machiavellian is someone who is very sneaky and cunning. In terms of politics, this person can be very deceitful and tacky towards his plans. He has the will and the motivation, however, it is stained with cold selfishness.

Tatiana [17]3 years ago

4 0

A person who is described as "Machiavellian" is someone who believes that "the end justifies the means."

The word, Machiavellian, is taken from the Italian Philosopher Machiavelli famous work The Prince which is a guide to political strategy.

Someone Machiavellian is cunning, sneaky and lacks moral conduct which Machiavelli, points out that "the end justifies the means" behavior especially among politicians. A Machiavellian person manipulates situations or their benefit by the use of human emotions when suited, and dropping them when not.

You might be interested in

Which of the following were major goals of the women’s movement in the late 1960s and 1970s? select the two correct answers

Nimfa-mama [501]

Answer:B and E

Explanation:

8 0

3 years ago

You Have A Term Paper To Write & You Feel Nervous & Uptight & You Use These Feeling To Write One Of The Best Term Pa

Fynjy0 [20]

I would say B. Eustress because this stress is a "good" type of stress that aided you in performing well. Eustress is stress that is "good," and helps you.

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

When a candidate plans their strategy to run for President of the United States, what is the ultimate goal?

Bess [88]

I think it might be c but I’m not sure

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

JulijaS [17]

Answer:

Below is my <u><em>entire</em></u> essay.

Explanation: The colonies, for the most part, were all in it together to benefit for the best of each others success. However, not all of the colonies could function the same. The New England colonies and Chesapeake colonies were both similar in the sense of their relationships with American Indians, however their economies, founding's, and overall factors of functioning are very different from each other.

The New England colonies had much different land and climate than the Chesapeake colonies. New England had rocky, thin soil that was far from prime for agriculture to be a playing part in the economy. So, New England resorted to lumbering, trading and fishing to keep up and have an active part in the overall economy of the colonies. On the other hand, the Chesapeake colonies were solely based on trading and agriculture. They had relied heavily on the growth of tobacco as it was extremely popular, and their weather, soil and terrain was perfect for its production.

These colonies were also founded on different beliefs. The New England colonies were dominantly puritan. A puritan was a member of a religious reform movement known as Puritanism that arose within the Church of England in the late 16th century. They wanted to get away from the Church of England and started based their reform of church in the New England colonies. Unlike solidly Puritan New England, the Chesapeake colonies presented an assortment of religions. The presence of Quakers, Mennonites, Lutherans, Dutch Calvinists, and Presbyterians made the dominance of one faith next to impossible.

These colonies were similar, however, in the fact that they originally wanted to be allies with the natives who were there before them. They traded with them and it seemed that everything was going smooth, but and the colonists kept encroaching on their territory so wars broke out like the French-American Indian war and Rebellions like Bacon's Rebellion.

Overall, the colonies shared the same objectives and wanted to succeed as a whole, but they had different approaches to their economic successes.

6 0

3 years ago

50 points!!

torisob [31]

The study of history is vital because it allows one to understand the world.

Studying history is necessary because it allows us to know our past.

History permits us to understand various cultures and customs.
Without knowledge of history, the West cannot fully understand or adequately cope with the problems that burden its civilization and the world.
As we live in the modern world with internet access, information regarding what is happening in the world is easy to grasp. We only rely on the reputed Newspapers and News stations to get information.
The determination of things happening around us can identify as relevant through their authenticity and accuracy with facts known to us or available.
We can only determine if the source is truthful or credible through accuracy by verifying the information already know against the data found elsewhere.

Thus we can conclude that there are many ways to find information about the world, but it is important to rely on its accuracy and authenticity sources.

Learn more about "history" here:

brainly.com/question/1914663

3 0

3 years ago