Have you noticed for example in Godfather II, Vito and Michael's difference and in Scarface Tony and Sosa's difference. Tony/Vito were just peasants in Cuba or poor immigrants in NY who really had no other choice to go into their field of crime while the latter two Sosa/Michael, one was English university trained and the other was in the army and had the world's possibilities open for him but instead chose to go crime and sort of lacked that gentleness/morality that those others had. So basically the lesson is go with the flow.

It's an interesting thought. Though I think both circumstances were somewhat similar, Tony was acting more out of desperation and doing what he could do to survive. Michael inherited the family business and also acted as a patriarch to the family when Vito was shot. I think they both saw what they were doing as temporary until they realized they were good at it and then power corrupted them.

Yeah but what about Tony/Sosa?