Roman Emperor Caracalla, a paranoid tyrant, increased the soldiers' pay by 50%, thus bankrupting the empire.

His subordinate Macrinus killed him & became emperor. He left Caracalla's family alone out of mercy and they engineered his death when his reforms made the army unhappy.

This family had 2 cute male children and a bunch of elderly aunties.

Macrinus, a principled, ethical and honourable man felt he shouldn't slaughter innocents.

But these same "innocents" engineered his brutal murder and his own family's slaughter.

Throughout history we see that the "right" man almost always lost to the "wrong" man.

The "right" man is brave, charismatic, honourable.

The "wrong" man is cunning, ugly, cowardly and totally unethical.

Yet he won, because he was prepared to do what the "right" one wasn't.

Thus the right man, if he wishes to win, must be outwardly holy but secretly unethical and do whatever is needed for the good of his people.

This hypocrisy is naturally resolved when the right man consolidates power and can once again afford to be truly ethical.

What should Macrinus have done?

He should have openly showed greatest respect for tradition and morality.

He should have secretly killed those 2 children and elderly aunties.

Then years later when secure in power, he could have once again become fully moral and ethical.

Hail to great Augustus who did exactly what I recommend & thence became the 1st Roman Emperor.

Hail to great Augustus who brutally murdered Caesar's 8 year old son because he was a potential competitor.

Hail to great Augustus who later on was a paragon of tradition & morality.