Machiavelli Being Disarmed Makes You Despised Analysis

Improved Essays
Sophiya Marsani
Professor Stoltz
English 1020. A03
29 September 2017 Being disarmed makes you despised In his essay "The Qualities of Prince" Machiavelli praises the skill of prince in warfare. He argues that an art of arms is one of the rudimentary skill of prince in order to hold his position on high. But Machiavelli focuses not on the effect of war on human life. In speaking to prince's military duties, Machiavelli says that "being disarmed makes you despised."(86) This statement stresses the importance of war for any rulers which sounds provoking and alarming. In
…show more content…
So far as in the modern society being defenseless is the matter of an advantage. Because the certain degree of respect is given to a person without armed, and his abilities and good manners to others make him hold his head high. And being defenseless does not mean weak and vulnerable character. In contrast to this, Machiavelli's assumptions are completely opposite. There is no doubt that weapons are the tools that intimidate people and makes the social chaos. However, people believe in peace, solidarity and disarmed. As a result, we can examine vocal against war, and crime rates are diminishing. This is the reason most warmongers are highly condemned. For example, Sadam Hussain and Bin Laden who were notoriously known for their support for war and terror were killed to end the violence and prevail the peace in the …show more content…
Though Machiavelli is right, people have condemned the path he agrees of bearing arms as a means of destruction and violence. With the weapons existence for ideal society wouldn't be possible nor would reduce the hostility. So, ideal society can be constructed by following the direction of peace and unity. Machiavelli may be historically correct on bearing arms but he ignores the fact that war has never played the favorable role to mankind. Today society is not built by arms rather humility, spirituality, compassion, and consciousness are the foundation of peaceful and exemplary society. And ideal leaders not only believes in war rather he strongly trust in the power of mind being wise. Thus weapons are the elements of violence and fear which is highly criticized by the people. Work

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Finally and inexplicably, Tierney conflicts with himself while asserting his thesis. He writes “It’s a paradox of war: The United States loses because the world is peaceful.” In a previous statement, Tierney had asserted that as the rate of direct inter-state conflict between major powers declined since 1945, they were replaced by an era where intra-state conflict and civil wars dominate the world of conflict. Nowhere had he shown any evidence that the world is…

    • 774 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In the book, War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, the author Chris Hedges examines why people engage in war and how they justify it to themselves. Hedges, argues that war serves as a sense of purpose to those who are exposed to this lethal and potent addiction. Consequently, this myth of war convinces the addict they are working together for a noble cause and that their adversary is fighting against evil. With that being said, war is as addictive as the most potent drug as well as the cause of immeasurable…

    • 94 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    War. Some consider it as a necessary evil, something that we need but don’t want. Others think of war as horrendous violence and death that is unnecessary. On one hand, war has the ability to erase injustice, end tyranny, and bring freedom and liberty to people’s lives. On the other hand, war is a brutal, violent, and tragic tool, and there is always a different way to settle conflicts, such as negotiation.…

    • 668 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Science of Machiavelli Machiavelli’s analytical tone and calculating demeanor, along with relevant historical examples to back up his claims, make his approach to politics extremely scientific. He sets up a foundation of effective practices for leaders to utilize, and his lack of concern for moral issues allow his work to transcend older political thought. He focuses on the preservation of the state as the main objective of a leader, and he advocates all means necessary to achieve that goal. The first scientific aspect of Machiavelli’s work that differentiates it from other political discourse is the fact that he thinks religion should have no place in the workings of a government.…

    • 741 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Agent Orange Vietnam War

    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages

    War is a period of time in which lines between right and wrong are blurred. When you’re up against a claimed enemy, the cost of their lives is the price you must pay in order to further your goal. Sometimes we don’t always know what consequences will follow our actions, but in this case, the price of war has followed on throughout generations and generations of people. Leaving a lasting effect on not only the claimed “enemies” but also on them as well.…

    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Robert Frost talks about a divergent road in the yellow wood, referring to two different paths that one could take. The two paths that could lead into completely different ideas of the world. Much like the views of Lao-Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli, one believes in the power of love and the other the power of an iron first. Lao-Tzu takes the role of a classic Gandhi Complex. He almost seems to view the world by separating himself from the world.…

    • 1229 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli and Hobbes both address the impact the human emotion of fear has on the political realm. In The Prince, Machiavelli explains how fear is a tool meant to be manipulated by the prince as a means to keep the people in line with the law and loyal. Not enough fear instilled in the public may lead them to disloyalty and then the dethroning of the prince; on the other hand, too much fear perpetuates hatred among the people and leads once again to the prince’s removal. Unlike seeing human fear as a tool, Hobbes in the Leviathan describes it more as a natural emotion of human which pushes the creations of covenants—social agreements or contracts among the people and the sovereign. In the state of nature, the natural condition of men without…

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In conclusion, violence causes many wars between countries. Non-violence helps to solve these problems in different…

    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Machiavelli’s Prince is a more morally ambiguous ruler; though he does not look down upon the just, and in fact praises and strives towards it whenever possible, the Prince does not fear committing harsh deeds and ordering unjust acts if he determines that doing so will further the interests and prosperity of his state and his people. He is trained primarily in the art of war, and places the…

    • 1713 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the written work “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli the author elaborates on how a prince can only be a strong leader if he engages in duplicity. Machiavelli focused on a more realistic and immoral strategy to keep the people of his time unified, realpolitik a system based on practical rather than moral considerations. The author, Niccolo Machiavelli, goes through great depths to explain why it takes rulers who are “cruel, dishonest, duplicitous, and manipulative.” There are many great examples to prove his ideology, however, the writing is very subjective and bias as Machiavelli does not give a rebuttal to the different kinds of ruling. He writes “The Prince” after the current leading family of his time falls in order to keep the stability…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the 16th Century, Niccolo Machiavelli gave the analogy of “the fox and the lion” in The Prince (1532), diverging politicians into two categories, stating that to be a successful leader one must be equally both. With a 24/7 media cycle that turns weeks into hours, 21st century politics have become unforgiving and unrelenting of errors. Julia Gillard’s succession over Kevin Rudd in 2010 saw her ability to be both fox and lion, distinguishing herself as effectively dealing with the Senate, managing her Party and making decisions, all of which Rudd lacked. Though Machiavelli is correct in stating that a political leader needs to be both alert and cunning (fox) as well as brave and bold (lion) it is difficult for a person of power to be capable…

    • 603 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli spent a large majority of his aristocratic platform defaming the many intrinsic characteristics of human emotion and experience. He consciously ignored the essential acts of care and compassion while promoting a message of fear and hate. His teachings offered detailed instructions on the succession and maintenance of a fear-abiding society encapsulated by submission. His philosophy stated that the best interest of the general public was to irrefutably follow the rule of law. To Machiavelli, a human life could be explained as an expendable resource, awaiting its designated task to serve the ruling class.…

    • 904 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In many political philosopher’s eyes, there is a special relationship between the ideas of moral goodness and legitimate authority. Some of these political philosophers believed that the use of political power was only morally correct if it was exercised under a ruler who had virtuous morals. These rulers who had virtuous morals were then told that in order to be successful, they needed to make decisions in accordance with the standards of ethical goodness. This moralistic view of authority is what Machiavelli criticizes in his work “The Prince.” In Machiavelli’s book, “The Prince,” the readers are introduced to political values that do not necessarily give full recognition to morality or religion.…

    • 933 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The analysis of Machiavelli as an amoralist – someone who disregards common views of what is right and wrong, unconcerned with morality as a whole (as compared to being immoral, and going against them) – is complicated. A traditional view of morality advocates for not doing wrong or harm to others, for altruism, and kindness. Nowhere in his philosophical work The Prince, first published in 1532, does Machiavelli show any regard for this kind of morality. The Prince is a guidebook for the maintenance of power by a prince (the name he gives to any sovereign); Machiavelli’s sole concern is how to stay in power and best exert it to prolong your rule and prosperity. However, this argument can only be made with a traditional, standard view of morality…

    • 977 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli’s understanding of virtue and effective rule emphasizes the maintenance of political power and the disregard for morality, differing from the ideology of the classic political philosophers. Machiavelli’s concept of virtue is centered around the glorification of a ruler, facilitated by behavioural traits such as bravery, cleverness, deceptiveness, and ruthlessness. Effective rule requires these attributes, as the successful application of these characteristics towards the acquisition and maintenance of power will allow one to become a powerful leader. Machiavelli first explains the foundations of various principalities, such as hereditary and mixed principalities, as the maintenance of power differs…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays