<Name>
<Subject>
<Professor>
Introduction
Julius Caesar, perhaps the most prominent dictator of the Republic of Rome, is among the most important figures in history. The charisma emanating from populist approaches and emphasis on skilled rhetoric of Caesar made him a symbol of radical political changes in Ancient Rome. It is during the reign of Caesar as dictator when Rome expanded its boundaries, incorporating the British Isles and Gaul, now present-day France. Such has become possible through the superior military power of troops that served under Caesar, whose tactical nous has earned him both admirers and critics (Yavetz, 1983).
Caesar, through his immense charisma, became successful in terms of instigating changes within the Roman Republic. The Julian calendar served as among his lasting legacies, which greatly reformed Roman society in terms of time organization and important events. The efforts of Caesar to consolidate the Roman bureaucracy enabled him to have stronger powers in controlling Rome. While that pleased allies, critics of Caesar saw such move as a motivation for them to assassinate him (Yavetz, 1983).
A modern-day personality that shares quite the same attributes as Caesar is Malcolm X. X was among the strongest proponents of United States (US) civil rights movements for African-Americans in the 1960s. While X was previously in controversy over his affiliation with the Nation of Islam, whose beliefs embodied black supremacy – noted as the opposite end of white supremacy prevailing during said decade, he eventually broke off from the organization to promote a more moderate and practical stance favoring the assimilation of African-Americans to the predominantly white society of the US. As he fought for the rights of African-Americans against racism through his rhetorical abilities and charismatic stance, he earned the ire of critics both coming from white supremacy groups and the Nation of Islam, his former group. His assassination in 1965 proved pivotal to the growth in strength of the civil rights movement in the US (X and Haley, 1965).
This study aims to clarify comparisons between Caesar and X with the main argument being that both share similarities in terms of their preference for populism and charisma and differences in terms of their advocacies. A perusal of relevant literature accounting the characteristics of both personalities supplement said argument with adequate proof.
Similarities
Caesar strengthened his political prominence over time using populist ideology, which he constantly delivered through charismatic speeches consisting of skillfully made rhetoric. His clairvoyant vision in politics and his ability to consolidate various parties won him the admiration of allies, which enabled him to form the highly influential First Triumvirate. Populism is the main technique of the First Triumvirate in terms of gaining power and influence within the Roman Republic. Through a series of alliance formations, Caesar prompted a series of successful invasions. Military superiority supplemented Caesar greatly in said cause, enabling him to take control of Gaul and cross the English Channel to reach and acquire the British Isles. Hence, the nobility of Caesar within the Roman Republic became both undisputed and a subject of envy among political rivals (Yavetz, 1983).
Since Caesar existed within a highly different context compared to the modern period, X proved successful in his use of populist ideals and charismatic delivery in terms of his efforts to advocate for African-American civil rights. The experience of X under white supremacists in the US that prevailed throughout the entirety of his lifetime inspired him to espouse the idea to create better conditions for African-Americans in the US. The prevalence of racism in the US proved to be a great challenge for X, especially in terms of choosing the factions he ought to support. The Nation of Islam, which advocated black supremacy, stood as the first affiliation of X. Yet, upon realizing that the Nation of Islam would not benefit the goal of establishing better civil rights provisions for African-Americans, X moved away from it. Having started to advocate social integration for African-Americans and against rampant racism in the US, X became a highly popular figure. Moreover, the populist ideals X espoused earned him the support of many African-Americans, although his charisma failed to penetrate his previous organization, the Nation of Islam. Thus, upon the assassination of X by members of the Nation of Islam in 1965, he was able to leave a lasting legacy for both supporters of civil rights movements and the US, as a whole (X and Haley, 1965).
Differences
The main difference between Caesar and X is the fact that they existed in different periods in history, despite the fact that their assassination both stemmed from ideological differences (Sklar, 2002). Caesar flourished at a time way earlier than the modern period, where technology has not yet advanced and invasions were widespread. Most of the supporters of Caesar within the Roman Republic saw him as a noble figure that constantly reformed and improved the condition of the nation through invading other lands and instituting governmental reorganizations that helped shape modern-day politics. Jealousy coming from the enemies of Caesar saw his eventual demise through assassination, with the thinking that his death would prevent his legacies to spread further. Nevertheless, the charisma of Caesar positively affected his legacies in the Roman Republic, starting from the rise of his adopted son Octavian as Emperor Augustus of the succeeding Roman Empire (Yavetz, 1983).
X lived at a time when the political climate is relatively stable compared to the Roman Empire, yet turbulent due to unfounded views on racism spreading during that time. As X went throughout his life under the perils of racism and white supremacy, he gained the inspiration of helping his fellow African-Americans to attain better living conditions through the introduction of viable civil rights reforms. Yet, X did not start as an advocate of civil rights movements, instead first joining the Nation of Islam and adhering to the beliefs of the organization centered on black supremacy. Upon defection from the Nation of Islam, X became one of the strongest allies of African-American integration in US society through civil rights reforms. The subsequent assassination of X has basis on ideological differences not with white supremacists, but with his former organization, the Nation of Islam (X and Haley, 1965).
Conclusion
Both Caesar and X served as noble leaders of their time that succumbed to assassination, but the reasons for their rise and fall differ from one another. Regardless of such fact, historical contextualization provides for their respective reputations as noble figures. Caesar upheld the strength and prominence of the Roman Republic through his political eminence, while X used his charismatic ways of delivery in contributing to the civil rights movements during the 1960s. Overall, Caesar and X are both similar due to their populist virtues, charisma and their deaths through assassination, while historical contexts proved their main differences with one another.
References
Sklar, S. (2002). Shall we bury "Caesar" or praise him? Ideas for the revitalization of an old standard. The English Journal, 92(1), 36-40.
X, M., and Haley, A. (1965). The autobiography of Malcolm X. New York City, NY: Grove Press.
Yavetz, Z. (1983). Julius Caesar and his public image. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
