Taoist and Machiavellian Government There are different communities and groups all around the world. Each one of these groups need a leader. Not every leader will lead the same way and there are different ideas about how communities should be governed and structured. Lao Tzu and Niccoló Machiavelli were two people that had their own idea of how a government should be ran. Tzu was a taoist and followed the Tao Te Ching. Machiavelli on the other hand, followed his book, The Prince. Both men believe that they know the best way to run a government. Each of them has their own ideas about the way a government should be ran, including war, and how to treat the citizens. Some of their ideas resemble each other closely, while others are very contrasting.
…show more content…
After reading both books, it could be concluded that there is a common idea that the citizens should be treated well and should be decently happy with the way the government is running. It is described that the leaders should do what they can for their subjects and avoid being hated. The leaders should know what it is like to be in the shoes of the citizens and understand how they live life (Tzu 387). By doing this, a leader can effectively make decisions and act on them because he knows what is best for the people. But, just because you are nice doesn’t mean you should just give the people everything in life and let them do whatever they want. The citizens should be shown decency but it should be known there are still rules they must follow. If the grip of the leader is loosened too much the people will start to take advantage (Machiavelli …show more content…
Machiavelli has a much more direct approach. In The Prince it is discussed that the prince should do what it takes to stay in power so that he may create change for the betterment of the country. He thinks that leaders should basically take the power and keep it. He believes it is okay for the leader to use force and tighten their grip when needed. When you are in power Machiavelli says you should be both loved and feared, but if you can’t be both you should be feared. Tzu believes that the leader should be loved and let things naturally happen. Tzu says that humans cannot change “the Way”, but they can bring their lives into accordance with it
After reading both books, it could be concluded that there is a common idea that the citizens should be treated well and should be decently happy with the way the government is running. It is described that the leaders should do what they can for their subjects and avoid being hated. The leaders should know what it is like to be in the shoes of the citizens and understand how they live life (Tzu 387). By doing this, a leader can effectively make decisions and act on them because he knows what is best for the people. But, just because you are nice doesn’t mean you should just give the people everything in life and let them do whatever they want. The citizens should be shown decency but it should be known there are still rules they must follow. If the grip of the leader is loosened too much the people will start to take advantage (Machiavelli …show more content…
Machiavelli has a much more direct approach. In The Prince it is discussed that the prince should do what it takes to stay in power so that he may create change for the betterment of the country. He thinks that leaders should basically take the power and keep it. He believes it is okay for the leader to use force and tighten their grip when needed. When you are in power Machiavelli says you should be both loved and feared, but if you can’t be both you should be feared. Tzu believes that the leader should be loved and let things naturally happen. Tzu says that humans cannot change “the Way”, but they can bring their lives into accordance with it