An Opposite of the Editorial Piece

A Timeless Thirst for power

Charles Isherwood

October 10, 2013

Julius Caesar is regarded as one of the greatest giant of the Rome history. He was the greatest general to have ever led the military in the country because of his charismatic leadership style, being loyal to those in power and his juniors and recognizing justice for all. In addition he was genius in the political field, a law giver, a great military leader and statesman (Charles, 2013). The country usually results into chaos whenever its leaders engage into conflict. In Rome the thirst of power by Julius Caesar in the search for democracy led the country into persistence wars and conflicts. Nevertheless, it is not always compulsory for a country to attain full democracy through conflicts as there are democratic ways in which a country might attain peace and freedom.

The leadership traits of Julius Caesar are much likely to be to in political, business and leadership theory because his traits were based upon the modern political oratory and rhetoric. The Republican Party in United States can be compared with some of the Roman conspirators who were determined to over throw Julius Caesar from power. Nevertheless, Julius Caesar was had a great connection with his followers and it is the sole reason as to why he managed to rise to the throne of power.  The American presidency is no longer a figure which rule with dictatorship which was witnessed during the Caesar period of power (Charles, 2013).  The Americans have the power to oppose the ideologies of the president if they are not in line with their expectation and if they are expected to uproar conflict in the country. Therefore, the president should be a good orator and always use the appropriate communication channels to deliver information to the citizens. Just like Julius Caesar who was over obsessed with power, the Congress, Republican and the Tea Party are obsessed in remaining power or even being in power. As opposed to the Julius Caesar reign of power where the leaders come to power through the conflicts and heroism, American leaders are elected democratically through national election which is always health every five years.

It is always obvious that the opposition leaders and those in power lack the social reform as Julius Caesar during his leadership. The health and security sectors in United States are deteriorating despite the citizens having elected leaders to transform and reform the country’s resource management. When Julius Caesar came into power in the Roman emperor he ensured that the rich paid more taxes than the poor. Prior to his administration the rich and those in power used to mistreat and discriminate the poor and the less privilege in the society.  Animosity was the order of the day for those in leadership position but Julius Caesar was such a reformist despite being termed a dictator by most of his opponents. Effective leadership exhibited by Caesar forced Cassius to influence Brutus into planning how to murder Julius Caesar (Charles, 2013). The conspiracy plan during Julius Caesar leadership period aimed at killing him but the revolution in the American government aims at ensuring that the leaders in the opposition comes into power. For instance, the House of Representatives in United States is forcing John Boehner who is the speaker to tear it into factions through conflicts.

As a matter of fact, it is believed that Julius Caesar character of egoism is the main source of his assassination and loss of power. Although the opponents of Julius Caesar claimed that his main reason for planning his assassination, they had a motive of becoming in power. By assassinating the Caesar they believed it would pave way for them to implement their leadership ideology with ease and effectiveness. Julius could be honesty and respectable to his opponents but they seemed to be ill minded with his leadership style. Brutus was a close ally of Julius but he is the actual person who planned and assassinated Julius Caesar (Charles, 2013). Julius Caesar had goodwill for all the individuals in Rome and he contributed all his knowledge, energy and power to ensure that the oppressed were free from oppression but it was evidence following his assassination that the public had no good thought of his dictatorship leadership traits. Most of the opponent wanted to be termed heroes for managing to bring him down. For those who assassinated Caesar, they believed that they were winners but the death of Caesar was a failure and disappointment to the oppressed in the society.

The dictatorship nature of leadership which was used by most leaders in the past like Julius Caesar to raise power is no longer accepted in the modern political culture. In United States, the opposition is necessitated to convince the public in regards to how they will bring reforms and transformation which will basically transform the lives of the public rather than using conflicts and illegal means to acquire power. Julius Caesar could not be regarded to be successful in his leadership strategies if he had failed to advertise himself to the public as a revolutionist leader. He was a visionary leader because he knew that if power was not brought into effect to reform and transform Rome the dictators and conspirators could no longer be managed.

It is no doubt that the modern leaders have an opportunity of learning the leadership and human characters required by a leader in order to be successful. Despite the fact that Julius Caesar was a dictator in some way, he was very successful in implementing his leadership traits such as: honesty, accountability, humility and respect for the rule of law (Charles, 2013). He had the mind of the poor in his mind and disregarded those leaders who mistreated them. A timeless thirst for power is an editorial piece that explains the political lessons which the modern leaders could emulate from Julius Caesar.




Charles, I. (2013). A Timeless Thirst for Power: The Political Lessons of ‘Julius Caesar’. New York Times. Retrieved from:



All Rights Reserved,