2 Definitions

2 Definitions

            Over time customs and trends change or evolve. In the pre-democratic era, a tyrant was a leader who seized power without being a part of the royal family. For example, during the twelfth century B.C, different groups of people were trying to expand their land in Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, led by King Esarhaddon, went on expeditions across the Mediterranean coast to expand their empire. King Esarhaddon would be classified as a tyrant, because he came to power by unjust ways. Over time this definition of a tyrant evolved and took on a new meaning. Post-rise of democracy the definition change into an oppressive leader. This new definition of a tyrant was used to describe the President of the United States, Donald Trump.

            Jeffrey Sachs, CNN Journalist, wrote an article about the President going down a path of tyranny through his actions in office. Sachs is swift to connect President Trump with leaders that have tried to oppress the well-being of Americans during the colonial era. Sachs states, “The United States was born in a revolt against the tyranny of King George III. The Constitution was designed to prevent tyranny through a system of checks and balances, but in President Trump’s America, those safeguards are failing” (Sachs). Sachs delegates the word tyranny to describe the rule of King George over the colonies. Digging deeper into this statement, King George was oppressive to the colonies by raising taxes and implementing laws that imposed on Americans rights. Conversely, when Sachs speaks about President Trump, he classifies him as a leader that disregards precedents that make our country a democracy. Sachs states, “The list of one-man actions grows rapidly. Trump is single-handedly imposing hundreds of billions of dollars of tariffs — that is, taxes — on imported goods from key US allies and China, without any explicit or implicit Congressional backing” (Sachs). These actions given in this article classify President Trump as a leader that disregards the idea that he needs permission to do as he pleases. In our democracy, we have checks and balances. Others may say the president does have the ability to use executive authority to bypass Congress and that is something President Trump has done.

            I believe that the term tyrant was used partially correct within the confines of post-rise of democracy. Sachs correctly classified King George a tyrant and in the case of President Trump. The information Sachs states in his article showed signs of a tyrant when President Trump put tariffs on our allies. Conversely, it would not fit the ancient definition of tyranny, because President Trump rose to power by an election.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/23/opinions/trump-is-taking-us-down-the-path-to-tyranny-sachs/index.html

-Denzel Polk

Word Count: 441

A Tyrant of Both Ages

The ancient and modern definition of tyranny vary greatly, with the ancient definition being a person who came to power in a non-hereditary way and having neither a positive nor negative connotation while the modern definition of tyranny describes a dictator and has a strictly negative connotation.

The current Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro, through his actions and pathway of achieving his position sufficiently fulfills both definitions of tyrant by both being a leader who was elected and not granted his position by birthright while also possessing dictator like qualities. The NYTimes has given an update to his recent actions in the article “After U.S. Backs Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s Leader, Maduro Cuts Ties”, showing how he has cut relations with the United States and demanded the American diplomats leave while also refusing to acknowledge his opposition in the presidential race Juan Guaido. (Herrero) As Venezuelan leaders are elected through a vote and a democracy, Maduro was able to win his position through the people. However, his time as President has been described as one of “political repression, economic mismanagement and corruption”. His reign of power has been described as tyranny and has kept power through reelections that have been denounced as rigged.

Regarding the origin of the word tyrant, the Greek historian Herodotus tells the story of Pisistratus and analyzes how he continuously rose again and again to the position of a tyrant. However, he is popular among the people and a leader, and he was quoted to “administer the state constitutionally and organize the state’s affairs properly and well” (Herodotus, 1.59). This shows the connotation that tyrants had at the time was not negative and could even be positively viewed.

However, although Maduro does fit the definition of an ancient tyrant in that he gained power in a non-hereditary way, his rule can only be viewed as unjust. His mismanagement of national resources has caused more than three million citizens to emigrate and resulted in those that chose to stay having a difficult time in finding basic necessities such as food, water and medication. His control of the military has led to high crime rates and suppression of any movements against his political party. Maduro has also received the backing of countries such as Russia, which is also backing dictatorships in the Middle East with assistance towards Syria and the Assad regime. Maduro’s actions and his firm grasp on power confirms his status as a modern day tyrant. Furthermore, his rise to power was strictly non-hereditary in that he started as a bus driver and worked his way through the ranks of Hugo Chavez’s cabinet, eventually becoming the “most capable administrator and politician in Chavez’s inner circle”. He assumed the position of President after Chavez’s death and kept the position after winning the election in 2013 with slightly over 50% of the votes. He has thus kept his position by decree with powers given to him by the Venezuelan legislature. As his rise and seizure of power was based on his own work and not due to being born into the position, Maduro is also able to fulfill the ancient definition of a tyrant as a ruler who gained the position through a non-hereditary way. Maduro, who has been described as a tyrant, has proven himself to be both definitions of the word through his methods and actions.

-Eugene Om

Word Count- 543

Tyranny in North Korea

Pablo Loza

Word Count: 502

In pre-democratic societies, a tyrant was viewed as someone who came to power in a non-hereditary way. “What Kim Is,” written by Matthew Continetti, discusses Kim Jung-un and his tyrannical ways. As written about in this article, the use of the word “tyrant” does not coincide with the pre-democratic definition. However, after the rise of democracies, the tyrannical definition has been altered to describe oppressive governments who, typically, strip their citizens from their basic rights, thus making the use of the word “tyrant” correct in context of the article.

In the article, Continetti discusses the families legacy in North Korea, but, specifically, focuses on Kim Jung-Un. First and foremost, the Kim family has maintained power in North Korea for decades and do not look to give up their throne anytime soon. The Kim family first came to power in 1948; at this point in time, the Kim family would have fit the pre-democratic definition of a tyrant as they gained control of North Korea from someone not in their lineage. But as time passed, this dynasty has led them astray from the original definition as the power is passed down through the family rather than there being a new, non-hereditary leader.

Albeit not fitting the pre-democratic definition wholly, assessing Kim as a tyrant is correct in many ways. In ancient times, tyrants often became extremely corrupt through greed, sexual deviance, and manipulation of people and how they are viewed. In this aspect, the Kim family does fit the pre-democratic definition of tyrannical leaders.

In the sense of greed, Kim has taken extreme measures in making sure his military is up to par. He is known for basing his rule on “totalitarian ‘military first’ mobilization, maintained by slave labor.” Kim wants the world to recognize North Korea as a world power and have other countries fear him and his regime. Due to this, it has made dealing with Kim a major problem for other countries, as nobody knows when he is not deceiving them, making Kim and North Korea nuclear threats, because of a power-hungry tyrannical leader.

Assessing Kim as a tyrant also coincides with both definitions in his manipulation of the North Korean people. Continetti describes how Kim has set up brutal internment camps, enslaved millions, and has striped the citizens of North Korea from any form of expressing themselves. In doing so, one can see that Kim does not recognize the worth of human life, as he has starved, beaten, tortured, and killed people from all social classes for even the slightest form of crime. Kim does this to his people to instill fear in them, putting down any revolt against the government, leaving him with sole command over North Korea as a whole.

The Kim regime is rightfully viewed as a tyranny because of their oppressive manners. Despite not fitting the ancient definition fully, Kim possess similar traits that were seen in ancient tyrants. However, in a modern society, the use of the word tyranny is used correctly by Continetti.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/kim-jong-un-murderous-dictator-tyrannical-regime/

In the Face of Oppression, Venezuelans Turn to Tyranny for Salvation

In modern culture, the term “tyrant” has come to mean an evil or unjust ruler. Even the legendary dinosaur Tyrannosaurus Rex’s name literally translates to “tyrant lizard” due to its menacing appearance and capabilities. However, when the term “tyrant” was first used in Ancient Greece, it described a non-hereditary monarch. Many tyrants were beloved by the people and wise and just rulers, while others went on power trips, just as any hereditary monarchs did at the time. The term’s definition in popular culture has moved far from its original meaning, however its proper use may not be entirely a thing of the past. The President of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro has been called a tyrant by his people, and the U. S. Government has officially acknowledged the opposition leader, Juan Guaido, as the official president. Despite the fact that they Maduro is a non-hereditary ruler, I believe not only that he is not a tyrant, but that Guaido is.

    In analyzing the rise of Pisistratus, Herodotus tells of Pisistratus’s struggles in attempting to rule Athens (Herodotus 1.59). He had to take bold and unorthodox actions in order to establish his tyranny. In the New York Times article “After U.S. Backs Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s leader, Maduro Cuts Ties” by Ana Vanessa Herrero, Guaido swears himself in as the President of Venezuela. This is an extremely unorthodox method to claim power given that he swore himself in while the constitutionally chosen ruler was in power. Herodotus describes Pisistratus as the leader of the mountain people, just as Guaido is the head of the National Assembly, which was elected by the people in what the citizens believe to have been a more democratic election than the one by which Maduro was re-elected.

    I believe the Ancient Greek definition of a tyrant is not very meaningful in today’s society since in most nations, leadership is not supposed to be passed down family lines like it was in Ancient Greece. So, I have adapted the original definition of tyranny to be better suited to today’s society as: a ruler who achieves their position in manners other than those prescribed by their respective government. Although Maduro’s rule has been authoritarian and oppressive, his power was achieved through the election system of the Venezuelan government, making his claim to the Presidency valid. Ironically, when the Venezuelan citizens demand “freedom from [Maduro’s] tyranny,” they are really promoting the true tyrant: Juan Guaido. Despite his high appeal and progressive values, as the head of the National Assembly, he has no lawful claim to the title he has assumed.

    The idea of tyranny has been demonized in today’s society and as a result, the Venezuelan citizens used it to describe their oppressive ruler, Mr. Maduro. However, many Athenian Tyrants, such as Pisistratus, were beneficial leaders who had the people’s best interests in mind. Despite the fact that Maduro is a tyrant by today’s definition, by a renewed version of the Ancient Greek definition, Guaido is the true tyrant in the political struggle.

Ben Stanish

Word Count: 504


Herrero, Ana Vanessa. “After U.S. Backs Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s Leader, Maduro Cuts Ties.” New York Times, January 23, 2019. Accessed January 25, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/world/americas/venezuela-protests-guaido-maduro.html.

300: A Somewhat Historical Film

TThe movie 300 is a highly controversial film among the public, including historians and critics alike. When I first saw the film in the 1st grade, neither my mom nor I knew what we were getting into by watching the film. At the age of 6, I didn’t have any deep critical thinking skills and I just enjoyed the violent action in the movie. It wasn’t until I got older and my thinking abilities matured, that I was able to form a reasonable opinion on the film. One of the major issues I had with the film (other than the corny dialogue) was its historical inaccuracy. Even if you aren’t knowledgeable about Ancient Greece you can tell that a lot of things in the film don’t make sense and come off as ridiculous at times. For example, the Spartans were practically naked in the film, when in reality, they wore armor, additionally the Spartans numbered 300 with no reinforcements when they had about 7,000 total men at the Battle of Thermopylae, and King Leonidas kicking a messenger into a bottomless pit next to where all the children play (which only stretches the truth to be fair, as they threw him into a well). However, this film isn’t historically inaccurate because of ignorance, but rather because the writer of the comics that led to the movie, Frank Miller, wanted to create a story that would primarily entertain, not educate. Miller traveled all over Greece and intensively studied its history, so as a connoisseur of Ancient Greek history, he still wanted to educate people to a degree. That is why women were respected and played a critical role in the film and why the Spartans have such a distinct warrior ethos, which were both true about Spartan culture. Authors and filmmakers know that people go to the movie theater to be entertained; if they want to learn, there are many books, documentaries, and classes that can advance one’s knowledge on a particular subject. This is why nearly all movies about historical events, people, etc. are “inaccurate”; the theater is not an academic environment. Now, do I think that watching the movie 300 is a poor way of learning about Ancient Greece and the Spartans? For the most part, yes, if someone watches 300 and the contents of the movie are all they know about the Spartans, then they are deluded. However, as Frank Miller stated, the best result he can hope for “is that if the movie excites someone, they’ll go explore the histories themselves. Because the histories are endlessly fascinating.” (Miller, during an interview, with Entertainment Weekly) Miller’s words are a refreshing take on all Hollywood blockbusters that deal with history. Movies like 12 Years a Slave, Titanic, and Gladiator are obviously not entirely accurate, but they inspire curiosity. Because of that spark of curiosity, I, along with many others, have become more interested in history because of these movies.

-Kevin Smith

Word Count: 474

https://ew.com/article/2007/03/13/how-300-went-page-screen/

Omar al-Bashir labeled Tyrant

The term tyrant is developed from the Greek word, Tyrannos, which means “sole ruler”. Ancient Greeks referred to tyrants as rulers who came to power in a non-hereditary way. This classified tyrants as coming to power through illegitimate means, despite the fact of whether they rose to power through common use of election, or seizing power by force of arms. Tyrannies in pre-democratic societies were commonly correlated with “statis’s” which describes a civil conflict with a moral problem within a city. This situation produces a leader to arise who is not in the line of ruling, but usually has public support over the power of aristocrats. Pisistratus an infamous Ancient Greek tyrant, is known for his success of acquisition of Athens as a tyrant. Through three different attempts, Pisistratus finally achieved the rule of Athens, rising to power non-hereditary. Although he used force in his attempts to seize Athens, as a tyrant he did not disrupt the structure of government and instead brought prosperity and stability throughout the city-state.“After Pisistratus ruled Athens, but he did not interfere with the existing structure of offices or change laws; he administered the state constitutional and organized the states affairs properly and well” (Herodotus 1.57). This quote demonstrates the history of the pre-democratic use of the word tyrant as a ruler who brings success throughout his rule in a region that has been previously corrupted with chaos. This definition of a tyrant does not fit the modern day association of tyranny which is plagued with a negative connotation. Common characteristics of a stereotypical tyrant include corruption, greed, oppressiveness, and more unfavorable descriptions. However, Pistastrus brought economic growth throughout Athens, as well as conducted public works projects throughout the city-state. Known for bringing stability, within both political affairs throughout the government and the economy, his progress in Athens sheds light on the term, characterizing tyranny in Ancient Greece and pre-democratic times in a good way.

Modern-day president of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir, has been described as a “Tyrant for Life” for his involvement in Sudan, connecting his actions to a modern-day perception of a tyrant, post-Persian Invasion in Athens (Reeves). Bashir’s label of tyrant differs from that of Peisistratus in pre-democratic times because of the abusive actions that cause him to be associated with the negative connotation of a modern-day tyrant. This analysis is associated with characteristics of greed, corruption, and bad intentions. Omar al-Bashir holds an oppressive rule has been marked with acts of atrocity against humanity, including mass killings and rape, along with accusations of war crimes. Although Omar fits the description of a tyrant through his actions to overthrow the existing ruler in 1989 using force, he used manipulation and corruption as means to maintain his firm rule which has created opposition within his own party and the resisting party and led him to commit acts that correlate to the modern day definition if a tyrant. Instead of bringing progress as many Ancient Greek tyrants did, Omar has created instability in the government and country, bringing hostility within the public. Not only has Sudan suffered from economic deterioration, but endures assault with a civil war involving ethnic cleansing. Unlike, Peisistratus and many other Ancient Greek tyrants who kept the structure of the government, Omar al- Bashir, in full control of the government, has managed to change the existing Constitution to meet his needs. Currently, Sudan’s Constitution has a two-term presidential limit, however, through Bashir’s influence within the ruling party, he has been elected a candidate for a third term, which would, in turn, rewrite the Amendments within Sudan’s own Constitution. With this change in the Constitution, Omar al-Bashir has the ability to perpetually maintain power forever, escaping any possible backlash for his violent rule and abusing authority.

-Caroline Foley

Word Count: 591

https://blackpast.org/gah/bashir-omar-hassan-ahmad-al-1944

http://sudanreeves.org/2018/08/13/8746/.

http://sudanreeves.org/2018/08/13/8746/.

Herodotus. The Histories. Start Publishing LLC, 2015.

Spodek, Howard. The World’s History. 4th ed., Pearson, 2010.

Is Trump a Tyrant?

The meaning of tyranny in the modern world has shifted from the original ancient Greek roots.  Tyrants today are associated with cruel and totalitarian rulers that aim to destroy democracy.  In contrast, the ancient Greeks’ definition of a tyrant was a ruler who gained power through non-hereditary means and held absolute power within a state.  By comparing the primary source Herodotus on Athenian Tyrants to a CNN article titled Trump is taking US down the path to tyranny, the divergence in meaning between the ancient definition of tyrant and the new post-democracy denotation of tyrant is demonstrated.  This is important because the different use of the word tyranny shows how democracy has changed society’s view of absolute rulers.

One story from Herodotus on Athenian Tyrants that illustrates the ancient Greek definition of Tyrant best is the story of Pisistratus.  Pisistratus took control of Athens by force, by organizing an uprising based on his military respect from the campaign against Megara, where he led the Athenian army to victory.  Pisistratus was given personal guards to protect him in the hill country, and he used these guards to seize the Athenian government.  Once in power, “Pisistratus rule[d] Athens, but he did not interfere with the existing structure of officers of changing the law; he administer[ed] the state constitutionally” (Herodotus, 59).

In an article titled Trump is taking US down the path to tyranny by CNN published in July of 2018, CNN says President Trump is turning the United States into a tyranny.  CNN focuses on his actions after elections to call him a tyrant.  CNN draws attention to President Trump’s authoritarian actions.  One authoritarian action was “Trump used executive authority without Congressional mandate to impose a travel ban on several Muslim-majority states” (Sachs, 2018).  Another example was “Trump single-handedly impos[ed] hundreds of billions of dollars of tariffs — that is, taxes — on imported goods from key US allies and China, without any explicit or implicit Congressional backing” (Sachs, 2018).  Both of these actions paint President Trump out to be a tyrant, as he rules the United States alone and unchecked, even though he could still be checked by Congress.

Based on the definition of tyrant, in the CNN article, tyrant is used incorrectly. While the United States election system creates a new non-hereditary ruler every four years, CNN’s definition focuses on Trump’s presidential actions.  Tyrants are not defined by their actions, but rather need to meet two requirements: non-hereditary and having absolute power.  In the United States, the other branches of government check the President in order to prevent a tyrant from ruling.  CNN’s use of tyrant is a display of how democracy has shifted the definition of tyrant.  Before Greece’s democratic experiment, tyrants were viewed positively.  After democracy took over Greece, tyrants were viewed poorly because they opposed democracy.  The use of tyrant in the CNN article shows how the word has shifted from meaning a non-hereditary ruler with absolute power to a more authoritarian meaning.

Mark Rogerson 428

Sachs, Jeffrey “Trump is taking US down the path to tyranny,” CNN July 24, 2018, accessed January 27, 2019, https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/23/opinions/trump-is-taking-us-down-the-path-to-tyranny-sachs/index.html.

“Tyrant” Takes On A New Meaning in the Modern Era

As we learned in class, the word tyrant, before the rise of democracy in civilization, meant to have a non-hereditary leader. This may come as a surprise to people today because that would make every leader of our modern society a tyrant. However, today the word tyrant is associated with cruel dictators like Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, and Kim Jong Un. All of these leaders imposed authoritarian power typical through martial law using either military or police forces to imprison and kill those who did not follow in line with government dictates. If one were to look for a tyrant from the pre-modern era, the most famous example of is Hippias. Hippias is the son and successor of the previous tyrant Peisistratus. Hippias, like the tyrants of today was a harsh leader, which eventually led to his assassination bringing in another tyrant. This is not to say all tyrants of the pre-modern era were bad like the ones today, but it is easy to see where and why the term is associated with cruel leaders. In the Dialogues of Plato, a translated source that contains Plato’s accounts of conversations which has Cleinias talking with an Athenian about the preferred form of government to run a new territory. “I suppose, that the best government is produced from a tyranny,” says the Athenian stating that a young tyrant can evoke a change to a government that is stuck in its ways. This confused Cleinas, but the Athenian continued, “change is best made out of tyranny… , that his strength is united with the men of the state.” Cleinas does not understand what the Athenian is describing. The Athenian asks him, “I suppose you have never seen a city which is under a tyranny?” Clearly, the meaning of tyranny and tyrant have evolved since the time of Plato.  Tyrants of that time were viewed more as agents of change and leader with whose ideas the population could relate to and follow to bring about change.  This contrasts with today’s modern definition as a leader who uses his/her power to oppress the populace and enforce his/her will through coercion and violence.

            An interesting article dealing with modern day tyrants was one from Vanity Fair titled The White House’s “Troika of Tyranny” Is Now a “Wolf Pack of Rogue States.” The take away from this article is that the use of the word tyranny is being watered down in meaning by politicians looking for the next political sound bite. The “Troika of Tyranny” is the term used by National Security Adviser John Bolton to describe Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, who are the communist countries of our hemisphere.  They are in fact authoritarian regimes that oppress their people and meet the modern definition of tyranny.  Do they fit the criteria for a pre-modern era tyrant? Yes, because they are non-hereditary leaders who took control of their countries. It is also important to note that in a pre-modern definition it does not say if a tyrant is cruel or just; it simply states they are non-hereditary rulers. Today’s politicians are ever expanding the definition of the word tyranny to include nations that are not necessarily tyrannies but simply do not align with US foreign policy.  This shifting definition of tyranny is not helpful in building constructive dialogue among democratic nations that do not necessarily agree on policy, but perhaps can help them find common ground for possible solutions.

Danny Vela

Word Count:  529

Source:

  1. VanityFair.com, “The White House’s “Troika of Tyranny” is now a “Wolf Pack of Rogue States”, January 16, 2019 by Tina Nguyen. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/01/troika-of-tyranny-is-now-a-wolf-pack-of-rogue-states
  2. The Dialogues of Plato (428/27 – 348/47 BCE) Translated by Benjamin Jowett https://webs.ucm.es/info/diciex/gente/agf/plato/The_Dialogues_of_Plato_v0.1.pdf

Trump: Truly a Tyrant?

The recent shutdown of the government in response to the debate over the funding of the wall between the United States and Mexico has birthed a vocally hostile environment between the Democrat controlled House and executive branch as controversial solutions to the delima gain momentum. The most controversial of these solutions being President Trump’s supposed plan to declare a state of national emergency in order to acquire funds to begin building the wall. This has led to congressional members adementaly opposing the idea and going so far as outspokenly stating, as one congressman, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, did, “We will oppose any effort by the president to make himself a king and a tyrant.” Congressman Nadler’s use of the word “tyrant” evokes connotations of monarchical status that is contrary to the ideals of disseminating governmental power among the people that the United States was founded upon, or at least has evolved into. On the contrary, a Greek tyrant was a ruler who established his domain unconstitutionally or via a herotitous manner, both of which President Trump cannot lay claim to.

Through taking advantage of the power of the presidency, President Trump’s opposition boasts that he is subsequently usurping the power of the legislative and judiciary branches in an effort to accomplish the goals the he, an individual, has devised. Thus, President Trump may be be deemed apt for the contemporary title of tyrant by those who share similar beliefs to Congressman Nadler. However, the definition of “tyrant” used by Congressman Nadler is contrary to that of the ancient Greeks’. President Trump’s plan hinges upon the National Emergencies Act of 1976 in which Congress designed procedural requirements that the President must follow in order to declare a state of national emergency, but not what constitutes a national emergency. Therefore, it is within President Trump’s constitutional privilege to expand his domain and usurp Congress in this manner. His verdict in wether or not he will pursue this method falls inline with the constitutional framework with which our social contractional obligation, a free and willing choice to relenquish power to a higher state, adheres us to.  

Moreover, our republic system also does not allow for the endowment of the presidency via inheritance or dictoral measures. As such, President Trump can also claim a mandate of the people to further support his cause. Since support of his presidency was deemed to be in the majority via the electoral college, then his voice, ideas, and execution are indicative of the majority populous. Thus his decision to enact a state of national emergency may be deemed democratic in nature, as his position as president is a conduit for change that has been proven to be the will of the majority. This method of funding the wall is not unconstitutional, nor lacking in a civilian populous’s willingness to subject themselves to his rule, so he cannot be deemed a “tyrant” under the Greek definition.

-Jackson Garber

Words: 473

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-wall-shutdown-national-emergency-pelosi-1283158

The Intersections of and Diversions between Modern Venezuelan Tyranny and Ancient Greek Tyranny

Maduro of Venezuela is one of today’s prime examples of a “tyrant”, however the term now holds a significantly different meaning than it did when the word first came into existence with the Ancient Greek ruler Peisisratos. The traits associated with the complex term “tyrant” have evolved over time, with its current connotations being more negative than they were when the first tyrant actually came to power. Today, people often associate the term “tyranny” with the likes of Nicolas Maduro, the dictator of Venezuela who is widely known for his political intolerance and aggressive leading tactics. An article published by The Guardian titled “’We want an end to tyranny’: Venezuelan diaspora calls for Maduro to go” depicts Maduro as the epitome as tyranny, associating words like “murderer”, “usurper”, “imposter”, and “oppression” with his tyrannical nature; one sign at a protest against Maduro highlighted in the article that best exemplifies this attitude is one that read, “Maduro. Murderer. Usurper. Free Venezuela!”(Phillips). This article, therefore, illustrates a tyrant as somebody who aggressively and cruelly takes control of a country, acting for his personal gain. Because Maduro is one of modern times’ most well-known tyrants, the term “tyrant” is popularly associated with these qualities, and has become a term that describes a strongly disliked, controlling, and aggressive leader.

However, the article’s definition of the term tyrant does not completely align with the definition of tyranny when the first tyrant came to power. In Ancient Greece, where the first tyrant Peisistratos came to power in 546 BC, a tyrant was merely an extra-constitutional ruler, somebody who came to power in a non-hereditary way. Stereotypes do exist based off of ancient tyrants, like gradual corruption, greed, and sexual deviancy, some of which do meet the criteria of a modern day tyrant. However, tyrants weren’t “bad” in the way that many people view them in modern day. In fact, Peisistratos epitomizes the opposite of what Maduro is as a leader. Although he did make violent attempts to come to power, his rule was generally good hearted and well-intended. His time of rule is known as the “Golden Age of Athens” because he promoted economic wellbeing and made several religious reforms, including bringing the shrine of Demeter at Eleusis under state controls, both of which promoted unity of the Athenian state. In contrast, Maduro’s policies ultimately brought the further collapse of the Venezuelan economy and divided the country. Additionally, he preserved the constitutional forms of government, whereas Maduro is widely known for limiting Venezuelan rights. Peisistratos was, therefore, a more positive leader who was widely supported, whereas Maduro is overall the opposite.

The article’s use of the term “tyrant” isn’t necessarily incorrect. It doesn’t completely align with the word’s original meaning, however the more negative terms that were associated with the word “tyrant” during the reign of Ancient Greece, like “greedy” and “corrupt”, do still apply today. There is, therefore, some overlap between the modern definition of a tyrant and the ancient definition of a tyrant. However, the term “tyrant” today is used in a more negative light than it was in ancient times, which the article demonstrates. Today, rarely is a tyrant described as having a positive influence on society, and, in this way, the article’s use of the term tyranny is incorrect. Overall, however, the modern use of the word “tyrant” isn’t completely different from its ancient use.

–Katie Mackle

Word count: 558

Phillips, Tom, and Joe Parkin Daniels. “’We Want an End to Tyranny’: Venezuelan Diaspora Calls for Maduro to Go.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 24 Jan. 2019, www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/24/we-want-an-end-to-tyranny-venezuelan-diaspora-call-for-maduro-to-go.

Starr, Chester G. “Peisistratus.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 16 Mar. 2018, www.britannica.com/biography/Peisistratus.