How does a Buddhist survive in a harsh world? The following video got me thinking:

Machiavelli’s Advice For Nice Guys

Machiavelli believes that being kind and compassionate is good, but one often needs to learn to be harsh and ruthless in order to survive so that good may triumph. The best example would be the Axis Powers during World War 2 - if the Allies had been nice, they'd have been no match for the Axis Powers for their sheer ruthlessness.

On a smaller scale in everyday life, it's the nicer, more helpful people who are constantly taken advantage of.

So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path?

Yet, Buddhism has survived 2500 years and even flourished at a time where war and cruelty were rampant. So there must be something there, and it bugs the heck out of me.
So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path?

I hope this is a false dilemma.

Some of the Buddhist principles that might help you to prosper (rather than "to be eaten") include:


Right livelihood (work for a living, don't cheat people, have fair business dealings)
Have good friends, but avoid bad friends
Be cautious, prudent, avoid being irrational or ignorant, when making decisions about business and family etc.
Save part of your earnings (which will help you to survive thieves and taxes and so on)
Equanimity (be kind but don't be swayed too much, don't be swayed more than is proper, e.g. to help other people with their misfortunes -- remember that each inherits their own karma)
Generosity (if you do benefit someone, don't feel that you suffer that as a loss)


The best example would be the Axis Powers during World War 2

I'm not sure that's a good example. Buddhism includes doctrine like,


  
  "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
  "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
  Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.
  


I'm not a historian but, for example, perhaps if the "allies" had been more generous at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 at the end of WW1, if the French hadn't wanted to further weaken defeated Germany as much as possible, then the conditions wouldn't have arisen for Germany to want to go to war again 20 years later. Maybe ditto if the USSR hadn't made a secret non-aggression pact with Germany in 1939 (which it did maybe because of its own fear of Germany but also because of its own greed to invade Eastern Europe). Maybe they're all, you know, a bit guilty: could have done better.

If you react harshly, where does that ever stop? And what behaviour do other people learn from you?

Yet, Buddhism has survived 2500 years and even flourished at a time where war and cruelty were rampant. So there must be something there, and it bugs the heck out of me.

Well, social cooperation (rather than social aggression) is maybe a winning strategy. For example people respect (and try to help) Buddhist monks, partly because they are intentionally harmless.