Why Is Alexander The Great Bad

Alexander the Great is looked at in two different ways, good and bad. In my opinion this young Macedonian king did not earn his title. Although Alexander was considerate to some Persians, and religious customs and architecture, he was still a terrible man. While conquering his empire, he manage to mindlessly kill troops, servants/peasants, and sell innocent citizens for his own personal gain.
When Alexander the Great conquered Tyre, he mercilessly killed over 50 thousand people. Not only did he murder this many people, but he also ruled with brutality as an important factor. While destroying cities, and only sparing some religious monuments, he managed to become a “success.” Pounding fear into the brains of followers, some, like the Persians, surrendered to him to be spared or simply out of respect. While Alexander did show mercy on the Persians and some of those who respected him, he still committed his crimes.
Only doing so because of the thought of losing his troops. While this may not seem to matter to Alexander because of his lack of remorse when his other troops were killed in battles led by him. Consequently, Alexander the Great was not so great, with no clear benefits of his ruling, what success did he truly have? Without sparing troops, his own people, and those who were under him, Alexander was a brutal ruler. His desire to destroy cities, buildings, and collect the cities riches for himself, led him to his unfortunate reputation of being ironic while going by, Alexander the