This example will show how the Austria-Hungarians were the strong and the Serbians were the weak. At the time, Austria-Hungary was one of the greatest powers in the world and has taken control over many nations. On June 28, 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand was shot and killed by Bosnian Gavrilo Princip. Austria-Hungary declared war and thus began bloodshed. Authorities in Austria encouraged violence against Serbians resulting in riots. The Serbian army was forced to retreat to the island of Corfu and majority of the soldiers died from hunger or cold on the way there. Serbia’s army and civil population decreased by almost thirty percent. Because Austria-Hungary was one of the biggest powers, the Serbians had to suffer even though the death of the Archduke was caused by a Bosnian. Just like the previous example, we can see how Austria-Hungary took actions to ensure its safety, even at the expense of the …show more content…
As humans, it is in our nature to do whatever can to protect ourselves because we live in a world where safety is not guaranteed. Ricken writes “man only suffers true damage if he acts against nature” (57). Power has been shown to assist in creating a sense of security in terms of safety. This results in the desire to become the strongest. In the example of the Athenians, by taking control of Melos they would display their strength to other rivals who may begin to fear them. This would lessen the risk of the Athenians being attacked and would secure their safety. In the case of the white and Indigenous population, they placed restrictions on the Indigenous people. This allowed them to remain superior and live in safety against those they considered a threat. Finally, in the case of World War I, Austria-Hungary eliminated their threat, immoral as it was, because it was beneficial for them. The strong will always do what is in their best interest, even if it is at the expense of those who are