Comment on Taking the time to put yourself in their time period rather than just looking back at them

<- View Parent
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

Caesar’s actions were blatantly unconstitutional

Bibulus’s were blatantly anti-democratic.

Caesar was a populist. His policies themselves might or might not have been genuinely good ones.

But Rome was - ostensibly - a Republic. His policies weren’t the issue. What stood at issue was the inability of the Republican mode of government to affect changes in policy through debate and legislation. A single intransigent Consul claimed the right to bottle up a reform indefinitely based on his personal whims.

This obstructionism was what ultimately broke the Republic as an institution. It rendered civil governance impossible and caused irreparable harm to numerous constituents, as a result. The civil war that followed was merely an extension of the violence imposed on lay Romans by the state under Bibulus.

And he knew full well that he was guilty of crimes and would be tried for them if he resigned as proconsul

The joke of it was the reflexive Roman adherence to a constitution that prohibited prosecution of consuls. Similarly, the obstructionism of Bibulus was only possible through consular powers that undermined popular governance. Both Bibulus and Caeser fell victim to the backlash, as mobs of Civilians and then Senators turned out to rectify what civil procedure failed to achieve.

Essentially, he was abusing the immunity

An immunity that did not spare him from getting repeatedly shanked in the Senate. Rather than facing civil justice, he submitted himself to vigilante violence.

source
Sort:hotnewtop