I believe that Caesar made a better leader during peace-time, however, both Caesar and Koba possess advantages and disadvantages. For example, Koba was a quite powerful leader capable of leading an army and easily overpowering combatants. However, he was a complete dictator during his brief time in power. This is shown by Koba restricting personal freedoms to provide the apes with more strength and unity in the quick war against the humans. Due to the leaders’ individual advantages and disadvantages, I will compare Koba and Caesar and explain why I think that Caesar would make a better leader in the long run. Koba, as stated before, is a complete dictator. from what has been provided, in the long run, I believe his labor policy would be forcing apes into jobs that best suit their, not considering the apes’ opinions. Koba’s policy has a vital advantage, the apes would have great productivity and stability. When you are told to do one thing for your whole life you become a master at your work. Koba’s policy also lends stability to the civilization. Everyone would have a place which creates a great deal of stability during peacetime and during war. Yet the stability would be destroyed by an heir that could not command the apes. Koba realized this shown by when Koba put those who were loyal to Caesar in prison to prevent a revolution. But there is one crippling disadvantage to Koba’s governing system, the lack of longevity. In history dictatorships always fall whether it being to a revolution, a war, or an incompetent heir, dictatorships do not last. This is crippling to a small civilization like the apes who may destroy themselves trying to change the government. Such a flaw especially when faced with a war means that the dictatorial governance of Koba is eclipsed by the somewhat democratic Ceaser. In the film, Ceaser is shown to be the closest thing to a democracy that could be reached by an early civilization. He is shown conversing with those in his tribe to craft a plan that would appease every ape while not aiming for personal gain. Caesar allows his people to work wherever they think is best, a very modern labor policy, despite a slight drop in efficiency the apes under Caesar have greater stability. The ability to work where they want and the possession of free speech combined with the command of a single leader when needed like during a war or civil crisis creates a civilization that has a lesser chance of rebelling without losing most of the strength gained by a dictatorship. However, Caesar is not immune to revolt, just look at Koba’s rise to power. Koba injured Caesar and used that to elevate himself to power, a major flaw in any government ruled by one person. Second, Ceaser has no direct control over his people like in dictatorships, Caesar has the authority to command his people but has voluntarily yielded his power to do so which can lead to weakness in a war if his people do not agree with the war, they could refuse Caesars command to the eventual destruction of the civilization. Despite these flaws, I believe that in peacetime Ceaser is a stronger leader and throughout history, in general, a civilization will spend more of its life in peace than in war. Due to Caesar possessing a stronger government during peacetime I have chosen Caesar as the best leader. Koba has many advantageous qualities including a great deal of stability and prowess in battle. However Koba is at great risk of revolt from how he gained authority and how he maintained it, imprisoning rivals and limiting free speech, a revolt may have been imminent if Koba stayed in power. Caesar appears to have been quite popular amongst the camp and despite a small contingent rising up against Caesar, they only did because of a perceived threat. Therefore, I believe that Caesar would create a very stable civilization compared to Koba leading Caesar to be my choice for best leader.