Defenselessness

Machiavelli's statement that "being disarmed makes you despised" suggests that in order to gain respect and maintain authority, a prince or leader must have a strong and capable military force. In fact, it suggests that any society that is defenseless is almost like a crime against nature. However, his assertion certainly stands up to the historical test.

For instance, one historical example that supports his argument is the case of the Roman Empire. During the early days of the empire, the Roman military was known for its strength and efficiency, and the Roman legions were feared throughout the known world. This military might allowed the Roman Empire to expand its territory and maintain its dominance over its subjects. However, as the empire grew more decadent and complacent, its military strength declined, and it became vulnerable to external threats. In the end, the weakness of the Roman military was one of the factors that contributed to the collapse of the empire. Eventually, Rome...

What happened? Roman leaders turned away from what, according to Machiavelli, should have been their primary occupation: war. Says Machiavelli: A prince, therefore, must not have any other object nor any other thought, nor must he take anything as his profession but...…the US to become a major world power, after all. So while it is possible to argue that being defenseless can sometimes be an advantage, in general, Machiavelli's statement remains valid, and having a strong military force is crucial for any leader or nation that wishes to be respected and feared.

In the end, I am not sure that being defenseless is ever an advantage, unless you are a cat and can rely on your charm to beguile any would-be attacker. But cats also have clawsjust in case. The fact is that almost everything in nature has some kind of defense system to ward off predators. Any type of society that lacks defenses…