Bibulus’s were blatantly anti-democratic.

You’ll note that I did not, at any point, suggest that this was a matter of “Bibulus good, Caesar bad”. Because “Bibulus good” is far from the truth. Any reference to whether Bibulus’s actions were themselves justified is irrelevant.

Everything else you said I basically agree with. The Roman institutions were fundamentally flawed. It was corrupt as hell, ruled for the elite to an extent that even the worst modern democracies would find shocking (famously, Caesar basically bought both his consulships straight-up, and that wasn’t even criminal), and reform had become basically impossible.

Rather than facing civil justice, he submitted himself to vigilante violence.

Unfortunately because of the rules of your instance, and the instance this Community is in (that even theoretical references to supporting violence, even if it is legally-justified violence, will get you banned), I am forbidden from sharing my feelings in this matter.