Preview

Lao-Tzu, Machiavelli, and the American Government

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
639 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Lao-Tzu, Machiavelli, and the American Government
Lao-Tzu, Machiavelli, and the American Government

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. Today's American government would benefit from a combination of the two extreme ideas. Lao-Tzu's laissez-faire attitude towards the economy, as well as his small scale, home defense military is appealing to a liberal person. Machiavelli's attitude towards miserliness and lower taxes, while being always prepared for war, would appeal to a conservative person. The writers are in agreement on some issues, such as taxes, but other ideas, such as government involvement in the everyday lives of citizens are completely opposed to one another. Lao-Tzu believes in moderation and small government. He states that a leader should stay within his country and govern his people only. He stresses that when the maser governs, the people should hardly be aware that he exists. A leader who is loved is better than one who is feared. The worst is one who is despised (22). Lao-Tzu also believes that war is not necessary when all follow the Tao. He states that "violence, even well intentioned, always rebounds upon itself;" therefore, if you have a neutral position, you will not be harmed (24). He believes that people are inherently good and not greedy. Man's greediness comes from an overemphasis on material things. Machiavelli believes in a strong government. The leader should be strong and feared, but not despised. A hated leader would invite a rebellion that would try to remove him from power. On the other hand, a leader should not be loved. Showing too much compassion will make the people think you are weak, and he would permit disorders to continue. Machiavelli urges the leader to always be personally armed, and preparing for war, even in peace time. The leader

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Summary: The writings of Machiavelli and Lao Tzu indicate that they would disagree most strongly on the concept of how a government should run. Machiavelli believed that in strong government control by a prince who acted more in terms of practicality and maintaining power than through moral principles. Lao Tzu, on the other hand, took a more individualistic, carefree approach, believing that a ruler will be respected and followed if he does not act powerfully and force rules and issues.…

    • 514 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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. Today's American government would benefit from a combination of the two extreme ideas. Lao-Tzu's laissez-faire attitude towards the economy, as well as his small scale, home defense military is appealing to a liberal person. Machiavelli's attitude towards miserliness and lower taxes, while being always prepared for war, would appeal to a conservative person. The writers are in agreement on some issues, such as taxes, but other ideas, such as government involvement in the everyday lives of citizens are completely opposed to one another. Lao-Tzu believes in moderation and small government. He states that a leader should stay within his country and govern his people only.…

    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Lao-Tzu’s writings offered a basis for Taoism, a religion officially founded by Chang Tao-ling in about 150 A.D. However, the Tao-te Ching is an ethical document as much as about good government as it is about moral behavior. Niccolo Machiavelli was an aristocrat who had his ups and downs according the shifts in power in Florence. His writings encourage a prince to secure power by almost any means necessary. Lao-Tzu’s Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching and Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Qualities of the Prince both have main goals of how to mold a better prince. Their views on government and the ways they attain their goals each differ in method.…

    • 839 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hongwu apply Machiavelli’s teaching by making people to fear him.From the class handout, it said ”Men will quickly offend a beloved person; but fear creates a dread of punishment which never fail.” this quote explained that people can easily betray a beloved leader but not a fearful leader.It also showed us that a king should make people to fear, scared about…

    • 1019 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Lao-Tzu vs. Machiavelli

    • 1382 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Lao-tzu’s view is government should not have optimal power over the people He feels as though the less people know they are being governed, the happier they will be. For example, in the Tao-te Ching Lao-tzu states, “If you want to be a great leader,/ you must learn to follow the Tao./ Stop trying to control./Let go of fixed plans and concepts,/ and the world will govern itself.” (Verse 57)…

    • 1382 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Lao-Tzu vs Machiavelli

    • 1508 Words
    • 7 Pages

    When utilizing the rhetorical strategy of comparing and contrasting in relationship to literature, a number of pieces of can qualify. In particular, the idea of leadership is arguably one of the most written about topics with regard to comparing and contrasting. Throughout history, it can be argued that the majority of successful societies have been based upon effective divisions of leadership. Accordingly, in their pieces of literature, The Tao-te Ching and The Qualities of the Prince, Lao-tzu and Machiavelli have sought to convey a more complete and concrete understanding of their respective definitions and duties of a ruler (leadership). The theme of political leaders and their intricate relationship with society indeed validate itself within both texts. However, both Lao-tzu and Machiavelli approach this issue from almost entirely opposite positions, though sharing minute similarities. Lao-tzu appears to focus the majority of his attention on letting problems or situations take their course, and consequently good would prevail. On the contrary, Machiavelli advocates the necessity for a successful leader, or prince, to take control of his deeds, and the skills or qualities necessary to maintain power. Since both writers propose a question as to what is in essence the same dilemma, effective leadership, it becomes almost natural literary etiquette to contrast the two in an effort to better understand what qualities a prosperous leader must possess. Despite each author’s contrasting approaches to rhetoric, they agree that a ruler should avoid being hated and despised, but disagree in areas such as government involvement in citizens’ everyday lives.…

    • 1508 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Lao-Tzu Vs Machiavelli

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Both Lao-tzu and Machiavelli seem to have a clear-cut view on how they believe the government should run. In some ways, both men have very similar ideas; more often, though, they couldn't be more opposed. A few similarities brought forth are that people in power must not strive to make everyone happy, nor must they be considered unmerciful and they should avoid being despised. The final view they both share is that they believe if the common people think they are happy, then whomever is in power will not fear for their power. However, it seems for each similarity they have, several oppositions occur in their place. From the way they believe how a leader should govern, especially in times of war, to the way that they feel about simple lies shows us how different Lao-tzu and Machiavelli's opinions really are.…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Lao-Tzu Vs Machiavelli

    • 1059 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Reading the works of Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu in succession highlight how truly at opposition the messages are.…

    • 1059 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Machiavelli was a Florentine man of many skills. He was a renowned politician, author, and philosopher during the Renaissance, whose views and opinions affect the way people still think today. The Prince is his most famous work and in it he essentially states that humans are “ungrateful, fickle, deceptive and deceiving”. For that reason, a leader should rule through fear rather than love. However, what Europeans needed during the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries were compassionate rulers. They were already frightened and disunited during the middle ages, thus adding a fearful leader to the mix would not help citizens feel safer.…

    • 101 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Absolutism Dbq Analysis

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages

    For instance, monarchs such as King James I and King Louis XIV believed that they had the right to decide things as their pleasure and that they were superior to others. King James I claimed that kings are god-like and are the “supremest thing upon earth”, and also “exercise a divine power on earth.” He believes in the Divine Right Principle and claims that kings can do anything they want because they are god-like. His purpose was to show how powerful kings were to the people of England. Along with King James’ opinion on autocracy, King Louis XIV claims that kings have the right to decide the country’s fate and give orders to members of the government for them to carry out. He indicates that the monarch makes decisions only and he asserts his power to the government. Furthermore, Machiavelli also idealized the concept of absolutism. He wrote The Prince, as a guide for the effective way to rule, for rulers of Italian city-states. He believed that all men were evil and would betray a ruler, therefore he claims that ruling by fear instead of love is a best way to rule and assert you superiority as a ruler. He created this guide based on his past experience as a government official dealing with the ruler of Florence, and later being kick out of the city-state. Many idealized absolutism because one can assert their power over others and control the country as they…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Machiavelli claims that leaders should be like a lion and fox. He says this because he says that the lion is able to be trapped, whereas the fox cannot ward off wolves. Also, foxes can recognize traps, and a lion can frighten away wolves. A leader should also be like a tiger. A tiger is defined for its passion, power, devotion, and sensuality. Those traits are all necessary for a leader. Also, dogs are defined as faithfulness, protection, and loyalty and those are traits that would help a ruler become…

    • 465 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He elaborates on the fact that the best leader is not even known to exist. “When (the master’s) work is done, the people will say, “Amazing : we did it, all by ourselves””, according to Lao. He is trying to restate and exaggerate the, quite possibly most important, point in his writing. He states that “the master doesn't talk, he acts”, showing that he is not only a leader for the positive relationship he has with the people, but also for doing the things that need to be done. Despite this fact, this “best type” of leader doesn't take the credit for what could be argued is his success. He does this because of the trusting bond and positive relationship he holds with his people, allowing them the success, but also maintaining his role in leadership by not even hinting at the true depth of his rule. And it is because of this that I agree with Lao-tzu; anyone this selfless and pure of intent deserves to rule over a trustworthy people, just as much as the people of any place deserve a leader of this…

    • 1145 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The basis of our American Government started out many years ago during a period called the Enlightenment Era. In this time, enlightenment thinkers thrived and were able to share their ideas on politics. An impactful thinker named Montesquieu was able to create immense change in his time and in ours. His system created three branches that, “placed limits and controls on each other” (Jackson, J.S pg.165), and are known as the judicial, legislative, and executive branches. This system he devised was implemented into the U.S Constitution so a tyrannical king ruling the people wouldn’t exist, and was called the separation of powers. Although, not every enlightment thinker’s ideas favored the people. Machiavelli is a prime example, he thought that as long it was for the greater good, then it didn’t matter which you did to achieve it. This has led to the government being able to infringe on certain rights of individuals to justify imprisoning them. . One of…

    • 511 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Confucius Vs Sun Tzu Essay

    • 1285 Words
    • 6 Pages

    iv. Thesis: Although the Confucius and Sun Tzu share different points of view on leadership, a balance of both strategies would be the most effective in times of both war and peace.…

    • 1285 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Both Martin Luther King Jr. and Niccolo’ Machiavelli had their own perspectives on what was moral and immoral. King and Machiavelli view what was morality right and how they would use this judgment in government and how it affected people in everyday life. King fought a moral fight against what was described as immoral laws to oppress blacks during an era of segregation in the United States. He believes that sometime it is moral to take action against immoral laws to get the results he and others that fought alongside him desired. Machiavelli as a Ruler, during a time when his country was unstable and constant political in-fighting, believed it was better to be feared than loved, and he took the immoral action of oppression to gain respect morally from his followers as a result. Machiavelli was a believer of the art of war to gain power, while King believed power was achieved in non-violence.…

    • 698 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays