Julius Caesar & Richard Nixon as Leaders

This research paper examines the question in relation to Julius Caesar (100 BC-44 BC) and Richard Nixon (1913-1997) whether it is more effective for a political leader to be loved or feared? The remarkably successful phases of the careers of both men suggest that Niccolo Machiavelli was correct when he said that it was more advisable for a political leader to be feared than loved. Both men, however, suffered from a high degree of intellectual egotism and lack of respect for others which contributed to their ultimate downfalls as leaders.

Caesar, however, was capable of inspiring the loyalty, if not the affections, of masses of men; but the passions he aroused threatened the privileges of key members of the Roman aristocratic class thereby bringing about the Senatorial conspiracy that ended his life. Nixon conspicuously lacked such intensely emotional support yet he, too, overstepped reasonable bounds in his use of power. In so doing, he forfeited in large measure the public trust which a democratic political leader must enjoy to be effective. Nixon was less consistent than Caesar in his use of fear as an instrument of power which in the end rendered him capable of neither being feared nor loved and ironically may have hastened his fall from grace.

Machiavelli had a somewhat cynical and pessimistic view of human nature. Men were, he said, motivated by self-interest and fickle by nature, "ungrateful, voluble, dissemb

. . .
inor in 47. Despite his frequent absences between 49 and 44, in Gaul, Spain and Egypt for his interlude with Cleopatra, Caesar had little difficulty maintaining his authority so great was his reputation and so feared his name at that point. The conspiracy against Caesar that resulted in his being assassinated in the Senate in 44 included opportunists, disappointed office seekers and others such as Marcus Brutus who wished to restore liberty. In retrospect, there is little in the reforms introduced by Caesar which could have occasioned such a tragic ending to a brilliant career. It was rather, most historians agree, Caesar's manner, his intellectual arrogance and, as honors were heaped on him, Consul-elect for 10 years, Dictator for life, and finally Imperator, it is little wonder that Caesar took on more and more of a haughty, imperial stance. Duggan says "Caesar offended Roman dignity by his brusque and offhand methods of settling awkward questions. His solutions were sound, but they were imposed nakedly be his sole authority" (170). Grant says "as a rising politician, he . . . had been indifferent to insult" but "now he was in too much of a hurry to be courteous" (187). He says that Caesar "became touchy about his dignity . . .
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Introduction Machiavelli, Duggan Caesar, Niccolo Machiavelli, According Balsdon, Nixon Ruin, According Duggan, Wicker Americans, Caesar Nixon, Wicker Nixon's, Wicker Richard, julius caesar, richard nixon, feared loved, ebenstein 193, political career, political leader, nixon ruin, york simon, york simon schuster, simon schuster, york rinehart 1947, leaders 3, ambrose stephen nixon, view human nature, modern political ideas,
Approximate Word count = 2733
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Julius Caesar & Richard Nixon as Leaders