Lao-tzu vs. Machiavelli Government is the essential authority of a country or state, which is directly, affects society because it provides key securities. Two of history’s greatest thinkers Lao-tzu, authors of the Tao-te Ching, and Niccolo Machiavelli, author of The Prince have similar but very contrasting ideas of government, and how people should be governed. Lao-tzu was born in the Chinese state of Ch’u. He spent most of his life working in the library of the Chou dynasty. Once he decided to
Lao-Tzu’s “Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching” and Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince” both have the ultimate goal of making better leaders. The tactics that each writer chooses to present as a guide for the leader are almost opposite of each other. Lao-tzu writings for leaders appear to be poetry. Lao-tzu’s statements are short and compressed, but they carry deep meanings. So readers should pay attention for every word and try to figure out Lao-Tzu’s purpose from every sentence (Jacobus 205)
It is important to recognize not only the strengths of the Tao-te Ching and The Prince, but also the weaknesses. There are some ideas present in these writings that are not practical for a modern American leader to follow. Lao-tzu writes that the best kind of leader is one that the people are hardly aware of; this would be nearly impossible for an American politician. The “Master” described in the Tao-te Ching is honest, humble, compassionate, and reserved. These traits are not what modern politicians
be the best way to become a great leader? Among these educated people, Machiavelli was one who suggested the methods of becoming a powerful prince through many examples and the histories of Kings lived in the past. On the other hand, Lao Tzu suggested completely different methods of becoming a great leader based on the Tao. Three major differences of their suggestions were about war, fortune and mercy.