Who among the following can be compared with Machiavelli’s ‘Prince’?

Kautilya’s ‘Arthashastra’ can be compared with Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince.’ Both works are significant treatises on political philosophy and statecraft, offering insights into governance, power dynamics, and strategies for rulers.

Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ and Kautilya’s ‘Arthashastra’ are seminal works in political philosophy, offering insights into governance, statecraft, and leadership. Although separated by centuries and cultural contexts, they share similarities in their pragmatic and realpolitik approach to politics.
Both works acknowledge the inherent complexities of ruling and emphasize the importance of effective leadership. ‘The Prince’ is a pragmatic guide on acquiring and maintaining political power, often associated with the pursuit of self-interest and the necessity for a ruler to adapt strategies to the ever-changing political landscape.

Similarly, ‘Arthashastra,’ attributed to Kautilya (Chanakya), is an ancient Indian treatise on statecraft, economics, and military strategy. It provides a comprehensive guide to rulers on how to govern efficiently, maintain order, and protect the state’s interests. Like Machiavelli, Kautilya advocates the use of force, diplomacy, and deception in the pursuit of political goals.
While both works emphasize the harsh realities of politics and the need for rulers to be pragmatic and strategic, they differ in their cultural contexts, ethical foundations, and the specific advice they offer. ‘The Prince’ is often associated with a more ruthless and amoral approach, while ‘Arthashastra’ incorporates elements of dharma (moral and ethical duty).

In summary, the significance of ‘The Prince’ and ‘Arthashastra’ lies in their enduring influence on discussions about leadership, political strategy, and the pragmatic aspects of governance, offering valuable perspectives for leaders throughout history and across diverse cultures.