Julius Caesar began his political career as an educated young man of the elites who advanced in the public hierarchy in Rome, which was then a powerful regional force at the beginning of his steps. At one point he became an important and groundbreaking military that steadily expanded the borders of the republic and transformed it from an embryonic region into a world-wide empire. The highlight of his achievements was his victory in the important war against the Gaelic tribes and the conquest of France (Gaul).

Returning to Rome from the "Gallic War" (about which he also wrote a book), Julius Caesar became a particularly popular figure on the masses and hated the aristocracy, the elite called the "optimists" (the good ones, in Latin), who were only given the opportunity to advance and gain a foothold in the establishment and systems The government, and only to them, was a representation in the Senate that was a kind of closed membership club (similar to the High Court and the judiciary).

The elites regarded the emperor as a danger because his personality radiated disdain for aristocracy, and the affection of the masses to him made them seething and anxious. He challenged the rules of government, and was a clear threat to the status of elites. They talked about "the end of the republic" (as we talk about "the end of democracy") and finished saying to get him removed from the political arena in every way. The assassination of the Emperor in March of 47 BC led to a civil war between the two camps: the elitist camp, the "Optimists", plundered the masses of Caesar's supporters, and the "popular" ("popular", Latin) camp that the elite thought was hidden and ignorant Baboons. There was a phase beyond a historical turn and marked the passage of Rome from regional power to a powerful empire in the ancient world for centuries.

The Sages said, "A groundbreaking king make his way ..." (Baba Kama S., 12: 12). Here comes the expression of the similarity between crossing the Rubicon by Caesar, namely: breaking the tools and rules of the game, into a historical figure of similar stature: Napoleon Bonaparte. He, too, is a nobleman, and he also despised the rules of the game. He was very hated about the aristocracy in France and throughout Europe, and he also leveraged France into imperial status.

Great historical leaders can never act and do not follow the accepted rules of the day. They are inherently fence-breakers, and their status as important leaders and seal-makers depends solely on their success or failure, and their ability to read reality in an original, far-sighted and different way from their contemporaries. In this, they are unique as breakthroughs, as those leading to tomorrow and not to the world of yesterday, which is always the responsibility of those who want to preserve the existing situation or even restore the old order that suits their needs.

This is where the sympathy of the people arises, hence the hatred of the elites. The one we said. "Great workshop," similar people everywhere and time.

Michael Yigal Maimon is a lecturer in the Shapiro Coffee Forum