Comparing Lao-Tzu And Machiavelli

In the World of Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli Even though Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli were both advisors there was still many differences of the two’s views on how a government should be. A leader is a person who leads or commands a group, organization, or a country. It does not matter what state, country, or city someone lives in they are guaranteed to have a leader. Leaders have been around in every era. If considered to be a leader, people wanted to be great and admired for what they had done or were going to do. Both Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli lived in different times and completely different geographical areas, but they lived as advisors. Everybody is their own person and of course they had different views on how a country should be run. Although they had different views, their ultimate goal was to be better leaders. Three main differences between the two’s government views included war, money, and government involvement in the everyday lives of citizens.
From what I read, my understanding of the Tao is the sacrifice of good government and moral behavior. He believed that if you go out and start something someone would want to retaliate and get even. He thought it was best to not harm others because they will not harm either. Lao Tzu said, “Violence, even when intentioned, always rebounds upon itself.” Lao-Tzu did not mention war, so therefore did not prepare for it. All Lao wanted was peace. Machiavelli on the other hand, believes in always being armed and prepared for war. He said being disarmed would make him be despised. He wanted to be prepared for war all the time, even in times of