Instead of holding power and forcing rules, Lao-Tzu wishes to teach simplicity, patience, and compassions.
He views the latter as "the greatest treasures" and if one has the three qualities, one will be a better person.
This paper deals with a study of Machiavelli's concept of virtue, human nature and politics.
It also makes an attempt to compare the ideas of Hobbes and how these are opposing to the ideas of Machiavelli.
According to Machiavelli, an ordinary person can also become a Prince if he has fortune and ability.
Human history has witnessed a lot of instances where individuals from lower strata of the society have risen to become leaders by the sheer power of will and ability.
Lao Tzu, on the other hand, took a more individualistic, carefree approach, believing that a ruler will be respected and followed if he does not act powerfully and force rules and issues. Lao-Tzu 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.
Machiavelli attributed many meanings to the concept of Virtue.
Foremost among them is that virtue is the part of a good life. According to him a virtuous man attains his goal in his political life.