Governing the People as a Prince or a Master?

There are many sides to an argument, depending on one's perspective. Lao Tzu and Machiavelli's thoughts on how one should act as a leader of his or her people were quite conflicted, but there were some instances where their ideas were in harmony. As I first began the reading for Tao-te Ching, I knew I would enjoy it right away. Lao Tzu had an eloquent and relaxing style of writing that was pleasing to my eyes. However, although Machiavelli's points were interesting and provoked much deep thought, his writing style was very straightforward and fierce.

Lao Tzu's ideas were very passive. He stated:

Throw away holiness and wisdom, and people will be a hundred times happier.
Throw away morality and justice, and people will do the right thing.
Throw away industry and profit, and there won’t be any thieves.
If these three aren’t enough, just stay at the center of the circle and let all things take their course. (p.25)

I find Lao Tzu's notions applicable for what I would call an ideal world. As much as I would like to believe in such a world, I don't think it would be possible after all the cruelty and abuse I have seen in the "real" world. How can people find such peace and contentment when in the corner of one's eye, there is war and hatred brewing? Lao Tzu's paradoxical Master is stated to let things find their own way since the universe cannot be tamed, but I believe that in a lot of cases, things need a little push or else nothing will get done; peace will not be found and abuse will not be stopped.

Machiavelli's ideas, on the other hand, were very powerful. I would prefer Lao Tzu's ideals rather than Machiavelli's belief of securing power by direct and effective means. Machiavelli suggests that the governing figure should be manipulative, pretending to be faithful or endearing or etc. He also states that it is better to be feared than to be loved, because "fear is held together by a dread of punishment which will never abandon you." (p.46) I feel that Machiavell's way is the most realistic and most adequate way of leading one's people.