Miscommunication and Missed Opportunities: Rethinking Conflict Resolution through Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Dec 11, 2025
https://doi.org/10.71064/spu.amjr.2.2.2025.437
Download
PDF
Statistic
Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Special Issue - African Multidisciplinary Journal of Research (AMJR) - 2025

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Shadrach Mwanthi
St. Paul's University

Abstract

Kenya’s 2024 Gen-Z protests exposed the fragility of governance when leaders fail to engage citizens meaningfully, a challenge directly linked to SDG 16’s goals of peace, justice, and strong institutions. Using Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar as a comparative lens, this paper examines how miscommunication, rhetorical strategies, and ignored warnings escalate conflict. Caesar dismisses critical advice, Brutus struggles to win public trust, and Antony stirs the crowd—failures that echo Kenyan youth feeling silenced and marginalized. Combining literary insight, African political contexts, and conflict resolution theory, the study demonstrates that sustainable governance requires transparent, empathetic, and inclusive communication. Literature thus offers practical lessons for building trust, resolving conflict, and fostering peaceful, accountable societies.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Mwanthi, S. . (2025). Miscommunication and Missed Opportunities: Rethinking Conflict Resolution through Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. African Multidisciplinary Journal of Research, 2(2), 267–287. https://doi.org/10.71064/spu.amjr.2.2.2025.437

References

  1. Adichie, C. N. (2009). The danger of a single story [Video]. TED Conferences. https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_singlestory
  2. Bitzer, L. F. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1(1), 1–14.
  3. Bloom, H. (2010). Shakespeare: The invention of the human. Riverhead Books.
  4. Branch, D., & Cheeseman, N. (2020). Kenya: Between hope and despair, 1963–2020. Yale University Press.
  5. Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the internet age. Polity Press.
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  7. Easton, D. (1975). A re-assessment of the concept of political support. British Journal of Political Science, 5(4), 435–457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400008309
  8. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.
  9. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means: Peace and conflict, development and civilization. SAGE Publications.
  10. Garber, M. (2014). Shakespeare after all. Anchor Books.
  11. Greenblatt, S. (2018). Tyrant: Shakespeare on politics. W. W. Norton & Company.
  12. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Beacon Press.
  13. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford University Press.
  14. Montrose, L. A. (2011). The purpose of playing: Shakespeare and the cultural politics of the Elizabethan theatre. University of Chicago Press.
  15. Mutahi, P., & Kamau, N. (2024). Digital dissent: Youth, protest, and power in Kenya’s post-pandemic politics. African Centre for Governance and Development.
  16. Ochieng, J. (2024, July). The language of legitimacy: Government rhetoric and Kenya’s Gen-Z protests. The East African Journal of Communication Studies, 12(2), 45–61.
  17. Ogola, G. (2023). Digital Citizenship and Political Accountability in Kenya. African Journalism Studies, 44(3), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ajs.2023.44.3.23
  18. Shakespeare, W. (2008). Julius Caesar (J. Wilders, Ed.). Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare. (Original work published 1599)
  19. Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press.
  20. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda