Various views on the Government
(Analysis of Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli’s views on the Government)
Almost any place that you live in, you will find that there is some sort of government set up there. A government is basically a form of system of rule, by which state, community, etc. is governed by. Although, most places do have a government set up, the type of government in which they have differ from each place. One of the most popular forms of government that is used often today would be democracy; this means that the government is ruled by the people. Monarchy is another one that you should be aware of because it is one of the oldest forms of government and it is still used today in some places. A monarchy government consists of the rule
…show more content…
Lao-Tzu believes in love and trust for the leader whereas Machiavelli strongly believes in fear from the leader. These views are almost complete opposites when paying attention to basics but the more you pay attention there are some similarities to be found, the main one being that they both believe that if the leader is hated then they government will struggle and possibly even fail. These views are almost complete opposites when paying attention to basics but the more you pay attention there are some similarities to be found, the main one being that they both believe that if the leader is hated then they government will struggle and possibly even fail. Another thing that you would be able to compare is that they both genuinely wanted what was best for their people under rule even though their views were complete opposites. Machiavelli said, “It is much safer to be feared than to be loved when one of the two must be lacking,” written in Machiavelli 's Ironic View of History by Salvatore. As far as their views contrast though, it was a very clear and direct that the way they looked at the government was nothing alike. You have one that believes that the only way to rule is to be loved then on the other had you have someone saying that the best kind of ruler is one that is feared, and that being loved isn 't relevant in this case. Lao-Tzu views this way of the government because he feels that if the people are on his side about things, than always fighting against him. Machiavelli though, is more intense on the idea of decision making and thinks that a ruler has to be ruthless no matter what the case, and is willing to make the best decision even if it isn 't the popular
Throughout history, it can be seen time and time again that rulers have different ways of rule. As expected, rulers may look over to different nations to see what is effective to prevent failures or encourage successes. With different forms of rule comes different thinkers and their take on the current methods of ruling which can be seen in Marx and Engels’ The Communist Manifesto, Machiavelli’s The Prince, and Locke’s Second Treatise on Government. Coming from different periods, it is expected that their perspectives are different. Assessing these works will ease the process of observing the differences between these thinkers and their thoughts on rulers who are above the law or have no morality and their notions of private property in society
Team C believes that Machiavelli’s principal idea is demonstrated in politics, “the ends justify the means”. If a leader is vicious and effective it is better than being virtuous and ineffective. Machiavelli, however did not endorse vicious behavior in general, just whatever would not “allow disorders to arise”. To remain in power, a leader must avoid the hatred of his people. It is not necessary for a leader to be loved; in fact, it is often better for him to be feared. The author states, “It is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be lacking” (p. 103). Machiavelli warns leaders against doing things that might result in hatred, such as the confiscation of property. Being hated, however, can result the downfall of a prince.
Machiavelli and Rousseau, both significant philosophers, had distinctive views on human nature and the relationship between the government and the governed. Their ideas were radical at the time and remain influential in government today. Their views on human nature and government had some common points and some ideas that differed.
Perhaps the most distinct differences between Machiavelli's and Lao-Tzu's are their beliefs in how a government should be run. Whereas Machiavelli writes about the qualities a prince should have while instilling a totalitarian government, Lao-Tzu strongly believes that one cannot have total control, so everything should run its course.
Each type of government holds different views as to the role the leaders and citizens should perform in their country .Different types of government include, oligarchy where the government is run by the best leaders, Tyranny, where they believe those in power should have complete control over its people. In the United States of America, we believe in democracy, rule by the majority. The main problem with our type of government is maintaining it. Our government and its citizens have lost sight of their roles and responsibilities, in government.
Is the purpose of government today, similar to that of philosophers of the past, or has there been a shift in political thought? This essay will argue that according to Machiavelli’s The Prince, the purpose of government is to ensure the stability of the state as well as the preservation of the established ruler’s control, and that the best form of government should take the form of an oligarchy. In contrast, in his book, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes argues that the purpose of government should be to preserve the peace and security of men and, that the best form of government would be an absolute monarchy which would sanction such conditions. This essay will utilize themes of glory, material advantage, peace and stability to illustrate
An effective leader is one that understands that a society must evolve and revolutionize, in order to meet the needs of the state that are of immediate concern. As a society we are able to build off prior knowledge of once existing methods of living, and adjust them to meet current demands. Both Thomas Hobbes, and Nicolo Machiavelli’s concept, and perception of an ideal sovereign remains present in current forms of government. Machiavelli’s ideas in The Prince indicate that it is simple for any civilian to gain, and maintain power
Plato, Machiavelli, and Lao-tzu each have varying points of views on government. Plato’s political views have more similarities to that of Lao-tzu rather than Machiavelli. In general, most people believe that in order to have a strong country you must have a good government that cares equally for all of its citizens.
These governments came in different styles such as a monarchy which was led by a king. Another form of government that was seen among the Greeks was aristocracy in which the polis was ruled by a small group of noble, land owning families. One of the more notable polis of ancient Greek was that of Sparta in which they used the oligarchy as there form of government. This type of government is where the people are ruled by a few powerful people. Finally, there was democracy which means “rule of the people” (The Legacy of Ancient Greece and Rome 1-7). This was the government that Athens utilized and helped establish. These varying types of government can be seen throughout governments today, however, it is the government established by the Athenians and their political structure that had a greater impact on the west than that of its Greek polis counterparts.
There are two types governments, minority and majority. A majority government is a government formed by a governing party that has an absolute majority of seats in the legislature or parliament in a parliamentary system. This is as opposed to a minority government, where the largest party in a legislature only has a plurality of seats. Depending on who you are, a majority government is either a promise of stability and calm or a threat of coming to a disaster. Again depending on who you are, much the same kind of judgment can be made for minority government.
Although they share some similarities in ideology, these parallels are greatly overshadowed by the concepts in which Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli diverge. Their primary distinction lies within their view of human nature and it’s role in governing. Lao-Tzu maintains that if we promote a system of governing to the least possible extent, then human nature should manifest a favorable temperance and dictate the direction of society. In fact, Lao-Tzu asserts numerous attempts to illustrate his point that if leaders, “Stop Trying to control” (§ 57, 35), then there is no desire (§ 37, 24), he dwells in reality (§ 38, 29), and “the world will govern itself.” (§ 57, 35) Although this is an extremely optimistic and beneficial ideal, the main problem with Lao-Tzu’s entire philosophy is exactly that, it can only be viewed as a philosophy. Because it appears under the section entitled “Government,” I...
The ancient military treatises of Sun Tzu, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Carl von Clausewitz are all too often looked upon by readers as texts that are not applicable to modern-day warfare. The fact that these treatises were published centuries ago—Sun Tzu’s The Art of War in roughly 500 B.C., Machiavelli’s The Art of War in 1521, and Clausewitz’s Principles of War in the early nineteenth century—only furthers the belief that these treatises were designed for ancient warfare and thus have no current day applicability. A thorough examination of current events, however, suggests that the tactics within these ancient treatises are still applicable to warfare. In fact, current day events—events ranging from the Civil War in Syria to the Russian-American
Democracy has been the root of a limited government, the system of which government powers are distributed so that one group of leaders do not have too much influence. The limited government has been structured to keep peace amongst all parties that are involved in the government. And under the U.S. Constitution, citizens are given ultimate power by their right to choose their representatives through the democratic process of voting. Each levels of the government are limited as they have their own responsibilities. The city government has the most local level of government as the residents elect a city council and mayor to represent their interest at the city level. All city governments establish housing and health regulations, and are responsible
A government was required to lead the people and aid in organizing a city. City governments were far more powerful than the council of elders and local chiefs of farming villages. At first, Priest probably had the greatest. In time, warrior kings came to power as chief political leaders. They soon set themselves up as the chief hereditary ruler and passed their power from father to son. Governments soon became more complex as rulers issued laws, collected taxes, and organizes systems of defense. To enforce order, rulers relied on royal officials. Over time, government bureaucracies evolved. Almost always rulers claimed their power came from god or divine right. These rulers then gained religious power as well.
Government- is an institution that holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct in a given geographical area. (http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/government.html)