Throughout history, philosophers, kings, and leaders have all had different, conflicting views on how empires and kingdoms run effectively. Countries fight entire wars over the chance to instill the “correct” way of governing onto another people. Arguably, Fidel Castro created one of the most successful socialist governments in world history, yet the United States disagreed with his ‘communist ways’ and ended his regime. In the mid-20th century, Germans elected a man who established stable government within their country, but who also ultimately led them to the largest and most well known genocide in written history. People enjoy being right, and telling others how they should run their lives, families, and countries. No two arguments for
…show more content…
When Lao-Tzu says trust, Machiavelli responds with cynicism. These two incredibly different worldviews have much to offer in terms of generosity, religion, external affairs, and even the argument of “whether it is better to be loved than to be feared, or the contrary” (227). The “works” that are being compared are used specifically for the reader to critically think about how much their worldview can be found in each “treatise,” and to view how two separate people could have almost opposite opinions, nevertheless have each be correct in their own rights. Though Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu have inherently different worldviews, they are both able to convey their arguments into strong, clear and concrete leadership skills, telling simple answers to complex …show more content…
I let go of religion, and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good, and the good becomes as common as grass. (211)
This section of the Tao-te Ching reflects on the ideas that Lao-tzu believes to be most detrimental to a Master’s successful society. In contrast, however, Machiavelli believes that a prince should be assumed to, upon being seen and experienced, full of mercy, authenticity, and kindness; but most of all, religion. All the things that Lao-Tzu believes to be nonconducive in a Master’s rule is everything that a prince must be in Machiavelli’s prime
When Lao-Tzu says trust, Machiavelli responds with cynicism. These two incredibly different worldviews have much to offer in terms of generosity, religion, external affairs, and even the argument of “whether it is better to be loved than to be feared, or the contrary” (227). The “works” that are being compared are used specifically for the reader to critically think about how much their worldview can be found in each “treatise,” and to view how two separate people could have almost opposite opinions, nevertheless have each be correct in their own rights. Though Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu have inherently different worldviews, they are both able to convey their arguments into strong, clear and concrete leadership skills, telling simple answers to complex …show more content…
I let go of religion, and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good, and the good becomes as common as grass. (211)
This section of the Tao-te Ching reflects on the ideas that Lao-tzu believes to be most detrimental to a Master’s successful society. In contrast, however, Machiavelli believes that a prince should be assumed to, upon being seen and experienced, full of mercy, authenticity, and kindness; but most of all, religion. All the things that Lao-Tzu believes to be nonconducive in a Master’s rule is everything that a prince must be in Machiavelli’s prime