Machiavelli, Rousseau & Confucius

- views of leadership

introduction

  The three people discussed in one case all had their own insights and views to leadership. They had distinct differences in the qualities of a beneficial leader. This paper will discuss each of their differing views and trying to place Carl von Clausewitz into one of their methods. Then everything will be summarized in the conclusion.

facts

Confucius

  Confucius was a Chinese philosopher in lived in times of political and religious difficulty in China. His thought on leadership was very rational and humanistic. Moral values were looked upon greatly, and this stemmed from the virtue of the ancient kings in China. Confucius felt there were five main relationships that would encompass all humans' lives at some point. These relationships are ruler-subject, father-son, husband-wife, older brother-younger brother, and friend-friend. The world is moving towards destruction and humans must act well and pursue happiness with himself and his peers.

  Confucius wrote his thoughts and teachings in his famous Analects. Here there were three main ideas on which he focused. The first is that people are teachable and able to be perfected. Men have the ability to shape and change their own destiny. There is one main issue to be brought out of this first idea, fate is something which is in our own hands. Only through work and practice can man achieve this superiority of man.

  Another of Confucius' ideas is that people are either superior or inferior. The inferior is he who is a loner and motivated by self-interest. The main goal is to get ahead of others by not taking them into consideration and doing everything for the benefit of oneself. The superior man is one who acts because he has a need for belonging to the community and society around him.

  There are also guidelines for what it takes to make a good society for these virtuous people to live in. Well-ordered relationships make up this good society of Confucius. There is mutual obligation and duties to be shared by all to make the whole be as beneficial as possible. People must do for each other, not because it is stated in the law, but because it may be the right thing to do.

  Confucius discusses his idealistic leader as well, which also can be found in his Analects. The first goal of leadership is to establish the ultimate goal of leadership for society. This good society needs only law and punishment as a basis for order. Another vital part of this goal is the ability to sustain it after implementing it. A leader's attitude should be based on piety and respect. A leader is primarily a gentleman and superior over other men. He is very cultured and is able to suppress feelings of self-interest within the society. The third idea of Confucius is delegation. This is the primary task of leadership according to Confucius. A leader should be able to divide the maintenance of society and of justice throughout the community, and be fair towards all.

Rousseau

  Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a French philosopher who lived during the era of Enlightenment and wrote about politics, education, and morality. His political thoughts are seen as one of the cornerstones of modern political thought yet they have been called mean-spirited and very intense for the time. His basic feeling is that human nature is innately good yet corrupted by the loss of freedom brought on by social inequality. His Social Contract deals mainly with political institutions and the search for a legitimate society. General will is a main issue discussed in these writings. The main purpose of his Social Contract is to create the society that has all conditions necessary for human's freedom by discussing the basic questions of human nature, organization, and leadership.

  Human nature is innately good according to Rousseau. It is society's corruption on the individual that brings about vices and negative thoughts and actions. In nature, the individual is characterized by self-love and natural compassion for others. This is healthy to the well being on humans. Despite society's corruption on humans, there is a possibility to perfect human nature. It is not a concept, which is set in stone, it may be modified or changed. Rousseau's feelings on leadership are also discussed. His first concept dealt with is the just society. Within this, general will replaces all of human's natural freedoms. It is based on a social contract where each individual surrenders their own rights to create a new corporate person. There is a very strong sense of community. Leadership is the way to facilitate this discovery of a general will and to implement this social contract. The individual does not give up his freedom, yet he rediscovers it in the new general will. Rousseau's system looks over self-interest and deals with a social contract for all to deal with.

Machiavelli

  Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian who wrote on the theories of leadership as well. The difference between him and Confucius and Rousseau is that he wrote on political leadership. His most famous work, The Prince, discusses the ways for a prince to act and deal if he wants to maintain his power. He is known for ruthless and cunning ideas which he expresses in this work. There is a term derived from his teachings, "the end justifies the means", and this term is Machiavellian.

  He had several ideas which were the main focal points of his writings and life. The first one described is that observation is more important than understanding. Wisdom and knowledge came from observing the behavior o others. Knowing how your subordinates feel and think give a great advantage when attempting to lead them. Human nature does not give the leader this knowledge, it is only achieved through observation and interaction. A second of Machiavelli's ideas is that human nature is inherently cruel and harsh. This, differing from Confucius, according to Machiavelli is set in stone and cannot be modified or improved.

  There are several ideas of Machiavelli that deal with the needs and factors of society. Struggle and intense competitiveness are two main issues of any society. The prince must act accordingly to these and he must act with intelligence. Law and punishment are key aspects of a society and of the governing prince. There must be a strong maintaining of order for anything to function within a society and if the prince wants to keep his position. Morality is also discussed by Machiavelli and ideals and virtues. Human excellence is measured in terms of virtue. This is the capacity to act without inhibition and with vitality. A true leader has natural instincts for power and is liberated rather than repressed. There should be natural instincts for power and profit as well, and these are very self-interested views characterized by Machiavelli. Religion and morality are less important and in fact irrelevant unless needed for creating a well ordered society. There are three main underlying sources for power, the state itself, the military, and the natural instinct for domination.

analysis

  Carl con Clausewitz fits best in with the Machiavellian school of thought. There are statements in On War where Clausewitz describes war as an extension of the political process. The Prince was a manual to the leader as an aid to achieving and maintaining this political power. Machiavelli's theory of observation coincides with Clausewitz's thought that the leader must see truth. In observing others behavior, one can associate with his subordinates and act accordingly. Clausewitz feels that it is vital to have the courage to follow this decision, and act without hesitation. A leader must be confident and Machiavelli deals with this as well. In order to gain power, the prince must be decisive and courageous in his dealings.

  Information analysis is also another commonality between the two. To make quick decisions, the knowledge must already be there and ready to act upon. Clausewitz says that war is such an uncertain situation that holds many actions on account of fate and chance. To overcome these issues, knowledge is the key. The prince as well needs to deal with information. He is gaining knowledge from his advisors and must be able to incorporate that into his own thought process and act accordingly.

  The ultimate goal of both Clausewitz and Machiavelli is a successful conclusion. Victory is key. All decisions will affect the outcome, and these decisions are based on the knowledge gained through observation and experience.

my opinion

  I am torn between Rousseau and Machiavelli. I feel that Rousseau is correct in his sense of community and belonging. Yet is seems very idealistic to me that all are going to get along and be prosperous. Machiavelli's view on the other hand appeals to me a great deal although it is very harsh. It seems to me though to be a more realistic outlook on politics and war itself. I disagree in the fact that human nature is stagnant. There can be modifications made to fit society and to better improve individuals.

  These three men have all differing viewpoints of leadership. Machiavelli's main focus is on the end justifies the means, whatever it takes. Rousseau feels that the general will and the social contract should be the main focus. Confucius is centered on the individual and superiority versus inferiority. Clausewitz, a learned military general, fits closest to Machiavelli when it comes to ideals on politics and military tactics.