One of the strongest features of the Roman republic was its very definition of the principle of republicanism. In representing a government where elected officials are meant to represent the will of the body politic proved to be a lasting legacy to all governments that followed the Romans. The United States Constitution used the Roman Republic as an example of leadership and the principle of republicanism was something embedded into the minds and hearts of the framers. I think that one of the weaknesses of such a system ended up becoming what happens when the citizens' needs are not met by representative government. Essentially, what redress is there when a government committed to the nature of the people's wishes are not fully embodied by said government? This becomes a critical issue and something that helped to destabilize the Roman government. It is also a reality that all representative governments must address, and in the process, one that helps to define the essence of how different principles of government must work with one another to prevent the weaknesses of one being exposed and making the government a crippled one.