Lao Tzu was a Chinese philosopher who was also known as the "Father of Taoism." He had many ideals and views but his main focus was that the greatest good is peace. He believed in flowing and effortless action, also known as Wu Wei. He did not feel the need to take control of things nor gain power but instead to let life play out. He also was a strong advocate on nonviolence and not forcing people to do things against their will. Overall, he had a very positive outlook on life and even in the evil, and trying times, he always found the goodness in them.
Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian advisor and theorist who believed that politicians who lie and are considered bad are actually good politicians. He argued that the most important way to be a good leader was to defend and bring honor to the state, even if that meant being unfair or showing cruelty. He very strongly agreed with realism and that effectiveness was key. Wishing for a future outcome was not ideal and taking action was an important way to ensure success in the state. While Machiavelli was not against cruel and violent actions, he made sure to not take away his people's property or families because that would only causes hatred. Ultimately, Machiavelli would believe in more cruel and forceful ideals that war was a major concern.
When It came to the purpose of the government and work of the state, Lao Tzu's beliefs minimized the state's power. He did not want the state to have the power of oppressing the people. He promoted freedom of the individual and thought the people should have free will. Machiavelli on the other hand said the opposite and thought that authority and power are equal. Therefore there was more individuality because whoever was deemed more powerful was determined to lead the people. When it came to the leader's standpoint, Lao Tzu thought that they should not take control of the people and while providing them with what they need, keeping them unaware would promise a successful government. Machiavelli is quite opposite of Lao Tzu in that he believed in more pragmatic and brief ideas. He believed that the leader, or the prince, should be concerned about war and discipline rather than showing generosity and mercy. He thought that if a leader were to display the characteristics of Lao Tzu's type of leader, there would be chaos and disorder. Ultimately, Lao Tzu and Tao-te Ching focused on a universal ruler and what would result from inaction on the leader's part. Machiavelli was more by-the-book and had a strict set of rules and objectives that he thought his leader should follow.
