Theory versus Reality

In theory, Loa-Tzu’s approach to leading a country is extremely appealing, but in reality Machiavelli’s The Prince better equips a leader on how to rule. Lao-Tzu believed in the goodness inside of people. While Machiavelli believed that humans were corrupt. Machiavelli also taught that the only way to govern a group of corrupt individuals is by deception, as long as it was effective. In comparing the two, a leader might question which method would be more successful. To lead a country in a Machiavellian fashion might be considered immoral and uncompassionate. On the other hand, following Lao-Tzu’s technique could put the leader at risk of his/her followers deceiving him/her.

In a perfect world, before all the thousands of years of selfish and corrupt governments, we would have been “raised” in a Lao-Tzu type of domestic. We would be taught that material items were unnecessary and the true way to happiness is being at one with the Tao. Lao-Tzu said, “When t...