Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli. Specifically, Essay

Hitler was an aggressive, dominant leader who was revered by many Germans. He overtook Poland and other nations such as Norway with virtually no defense at all because they were unprepared and their leaders did not anticipate or approve of aggression and defense. They were wrong, and it cost them dearly. If these nations had put up a real fight, the war might have had a different outcome. The same is true of the Holocaust. For the most part, most victims did not fight back, and offered little resistance as they were moved first to Jewish ghettos and then concentration camps. Had they risen up as a group and defended themselves, their fate might have been different as well.

Hitler was not a hero, or even a respected world leader, but those around him were weak, and that led to their downfall. A good leader is defensive, but also prudent, and that is one thing Hitler was not. His dreams of world domination and his extermination of the Jews showed him to be inhumane and imprudent, which, even though he used aggression, led to his downfall and the downfall of the Nazi party. Machiavelli even addresses this situation. He writes, "But when the prince is with his armies and has under his command a multitude of troops, then it is absolutely necessary that he not worry about being considered cruel; for without that reputation he will never keep an army united or prepared for any combat" (Machiavelli 44). This proved to be the case with Hitler, who lost control of the war and his army before the war in Europe ended. Hitler led his country down the wrong path, and he literally committed suicide in the end. He is proof that unbridled aggression is not the answer, but defense and preparation are indeed the way to manage a successful nation and lead effectively.

Machiavelli also makes an interesting observation that those who are defenseless are common, while those who are effective at war are not. A private citizen can rise to power as a leader if he anticipates aggression and applies himself to an active defense.This has been the case with many of the nation's most loved leaders, including George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, Dwight Eisenhower, and Teddy Roosevelt. They were all effective military leaders who had successful military careers before they became politicians. Because of their leadership qualities and their attention to defense and war, they became effective leaders who knew the value of maintaining defense. They also led the country through times of peace that ended up being times of defensive strategy, such as the Cold War during Eisenhower's leadership. They proved the need for continued defense of the nation even in peacetime, and showed how a leader can rise to the top with the ability to defend and conquer others.

In conclusion, defenselessness is simply another word for the suicide of a nation. A nation that does not engage in active defense is a nation without leadership and strength. A leader who is afraid to defend his nation is a leader who will not succeed. The dream of peace is a noble dream, but leaders who succumb to dreams of peace without the reality of a defense strategy will only lead their nations to failure and submission. Dreams are wonderful for philosophers, but they do not create the defense necessary to keep a nation and her citizens safe from harm. As long as there is evil in the world, there will be aggression and the need for a strong defense. A leader who does not recognize that is not really a leader, but a murderer, leaving his citizens open to the aggression and destruction of others. War is a reality, and so is the defense of any successful nation.

References

Machiavelli, Niccolo. "The Qualities of the Prince." A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Jacobus, Lee A. ed. New….....