The American Heritage Dictionary defines ethics as "A set of principles of right conduct.", and defines morals as "Rules or habits of conduct, especially of sexual conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong". Most people would say that people with the strongest ethics and the highest moral character will get far in life, and live a life of prosperity. At the end of the day this is totally wrong. The fact of the matter is that most people are followers, and will say and do what they think is the most popular decision. I am here to say that the only people who get far in life are the ones who make decisions on what is best for themselves and the others around them.
             If most people are followers then what makes a certain person a leader? There is no certain formula, no special attributes, and are no right or wrong ways that a leader can lead his/or her following. Hitler chose to lead all of the Northwestern part of Europe against the rest of the continent, and a whole religion of people. Martin Luther King chose to lead his people against the oppressions of the day. These are only some examples, but the fact is that you can either lead your people to salvation or lead them to damnation.
             I read the book "The Prince" by Nicolò Machiavelli two weeks ago, and a lot of the principles that he talks about that deals with medieval living, and old European tactics in politics still hold true to this day. Ideals such as ".....one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.", and "And a prince ought, above all things, always to endeavor in every action to gain for himself the reputation of being a great and remarkable man.". Theses sayings and o...