Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli on Government
Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli have radically opposing views on government and government leaders. Lao-TzuÆs view of the ideal government is one that is very simple, does not wage war, and does not interfere in peopleÆs lives (Hooker). It would not ôwallow in luxury and wealth,ö and it would preferably be inactiveùprimarily guiding rather than governing (Hooker). MachiavelliÆs view of government, on the other hand, is that it is best governed by a very controlling and powerful leader who is not averse to ôruthlessness, deception, and crueltyö (Kemerling). Within these diametrically opposed views of government lie vastly different perspectives on the ultimate purpose of government, the obligations of the leader to the people being led, and the primary work of the state.
Lao-TzuÆs view of government is predicated on Taoism, a Chinese philosophy based on the idea that ôall material things and all the change in the world lies in one fundamental, universal principle: the Way or Taoö (Hooker). Taoists view this principle as the source of all existence and believe that it governs everything in life (Hooker). Although the world may be complex and contradictory, the Tao is simple and unified; therefore, the purpose of manÆs life is to live according to the Tao in a passive, non-resistant manner (Hooker). Above all, one must not plan, ôfor to plan is to go against the Taoö (Hooker). The Taoist leader of a country would be gentle, unassuming, and noncontrollingùobliged to guide his people rather than rule them. The work of the state would mainly be to facilitate a Taoist lifestyleùsort of a serene, serendipitous acceptance of whatever occurs. Lao-TzuÆs writings are obscure and hard to read, more like random thoughts than a cohesive treatise on government.
Machiavelli, on the other hand, viewed government as an institution that should minutely control the affairs of the country, us...