Was Robespierre Justified

The French Revolution was based on an assortment of Enlightenment ideals. French philosophers, including Voltaire and Rousseau led the revolution leading up to the revolution, so to speak, coming up with progressive ideals as to government, social structure, and the nature of people. Indeed, the ideals which the revolution was fought in the name of progressed throughout France and, eventually, Europe. Though the revolution took wrong turns along the way, the ideals which it was based on never wavered. Even during the heart of his Reign of Terror, Robespierre spoke of a state where each citizen wants to do good by his country. This shows Robespierre with an unwavering commitment to the state, an ideal which came out of the Enlightenment. Though he may have carried out his beliefs in a gruesome and perhaps wrong way, his ideals were the same as the Enlightenment philosophers: make the state better for all to live in.

The Reign of Terror, was it justified? A wife beheaded, a revolution , and thirty-five to forty thousand people killed in the countryside alone. It was all happening in France, starting in the year 1789. A man named Maximilien Robespierre and his countrymen have decided that they dislike the current government system and overthrow it. They are successful and try to turn it to democracy, but in order to keep the power they end up having to execute nearly all government officials. Later, the counter revolutionists throw them over, so was Robespierre justified? The reign of terror was not justified because of the way the government treated their people, How they restricted the citizens rights, and finally how they treated their “criminals”.

Sources A and B support the claim established by contemporaries and historians that Robespierre was “incorruptible”, however Robespierre was also despotic, extreme, and radical. Robespierre’s strong opinions, extremism, and despotism support that he was not easily persuaded or corruptible. Source A shows Robespierre saying “the sword that gleams in the hands of the heroes of liberty resembles those in the hands of the henchmen of tyranny”. This statement supports that the government was despotic, which shows that Robespierre was a brutal leader not easily persuaded or corrupted. His statement, “Let the despot govern by terror his brutalised subjects; he is right, as a despot” supports that Robespierre had very strong opinions, showing that

That was similar to the american saying of the american revolution. So I believe that The Reign of Terror is justified because of a new government, internal enemies, and external enemies. The first reason that the reign of terror was justified is because France was in need of a new government. The government that the revolution was trying to place in france was a republic.

First, Robespierre declared, "Terror the order of the day" (Document B). This declaration was a start to Robespierre's idea of killing all traitors and enlightenment idealists. When one does not commit to listening to the ideas of every person, problems and conflict emerge, thus his ideas did not end in rejoice. Robespierre also didn't recognize people that had other ideals as citizensa citizens in the Republic but the republicans" (Document G). His quote means that conservatives will be the only ones receiving the perks of being a citizen. Robespierre tried to make the country united in thinking, but when civilians didn't agree with his ideas, he simply killed them, which is inhumane and unjustified in almost any case. Killing people doesn't solve any problems as more people will take their place. Robespierre didn't understand the gruesome immorality of killing as "16,000 people were guillotined during the Reign of Terror" (Document F). Executing in large amounts to prove a point isn’t a fantastic deal breaker to anyone. These examples prove the Reign of Terror was unreasonable as he did not listen to the overwhelming majority of the people and ended up massacring them to solve

Was this Violent Period During the French Revolution Necessary? Robespierre, the most famous French Revolutionary, believes that the citizens of France should extinguish the threats inside and outside of France or meet one’s death. Began in 1789, the French Revolution began as an attempt to form a new government in France. This gruesome period, that lasted about ten to eleven months, was the Reign of Terror.

The French Revolution is arguably the bloodiest period in French history, with men such as Maximilien Robespierre leading the country into a situation of state sponsored terror. Originally being quite a liberal thinker inspired by the works of Rousseau, Robespierre quickly gained a reputation for being a radical throughout the course of the Revolution, especially during the Terror. Early on terror was justified as a means to root out foreign and domestic enemies of the Revolution, however; once the foreign threat had been taken care of it became increasingly difficult for Robespierre to rationalize his use of terror to bring about a supposed Republic of Virtue. In his speech, the “Justification of the use of Terror” which he presented to

Terror is Justified Violence isn’t the way, but in France this is not the case. In France 1789 the French Revolution started. It was caused by King Louis XVI considering the people wanted Liberty, Sovereignty, and equality. Since the people wanted those thing King Louis was forced to share his power. The Reign of Terror began in September 5, 1793; which was led by Maximilien Robespierre.

As more peoples blood is split to gain the rights not extended to them, the Terror grows becoming more and more gruesome. The French revolution began in late 1789 to obtain the rights that every citizen in born with. The motto of the French was liberty, equality, or death and the price to be paid for the civil liberties was blood. The revolutionary leader Robespierre and journalist Marat explained the more blood the better so that was what raged the people and started the Reign of Terror. Were the values expressed by the French Revolution necessary though? Even though, the French Revolution saw the Terror as a sign to create peace and restore a new France it was not justified because the extremities of the internal and external threats

The radical turning point of the revolution, marked by the Reign of Terror, was an atmosphere of mass executions and imposed paranoia, with more than ten thousand “counterrevolutionaries” (vaguely defined, which at the end turned out to be anyone with dissent) sent to death under the Law of Suspects. Robespierre himself states that “Terror is nothing but prompt, severe, inflexible justice; it is therefore an emanation of virtue… The government of the revolution is the despotism of liberty against tyranny”. “Severe and inflexible”, as justified by Robespierre, the revolution needed a push in order to reach its goals. France under the committee's total control sent anyone with dissent to the guillotine because they were considered to be a threat to the new government, which ironically named itself “for the people”. An anonymous eyewitness during the reign commented on the Reign of Terror collection of authentic narratives that “It seemed as if their blind fury was particularly directed against the weakest and most amiable.The loveliest, the youngest, and the most interesting females, were dragged in crowds into this receptacle of misery, whence they were led, by dozens, to inundate the scaffold” (325). The sickening extent of human toll

Maximilien Robespierre has always been known to be controversial and misunderstood. He was the face of the French Revolution. In accordance with the Jacobins, they controlled the time known as the Reign of Terror, due to their influence in the accumulation of murders of those opposed to the revolution. Reign of Terror was a symbolic time period within the French Revolution that involved corruption of power and influence and mass executions. With Robespierre at the forefront, he became one of the most important men in the Revolution. As soon as Maximilien Robespierre decided to react to enemies of the revolutions, mass execution being his choice of force; his implementation of the Reign of Terror was a villainous act striking those who

Robespierre was honestly working for the good of the people. He once stopped 75 Girondins from being tried for signing a secret protest against their leaders’ arrests, knowing they would be executed (Hampson 139). Much of the public understood and loved Robespierre. When he was finally arrested, the prison guard refused to hold him (Gaxotte 223). Instead of fleeing, he returned to Paris where a crowd of his followers congregated. He absolutely forbid them to fight for him, as they were planning (Geib). His altruistic efforts suggest some outside force caused the change in his allowing of the more brutal manner of reformation, later, when the many thousands of people were executed. Jean-Jacques Rousseau may have influenced Robespierre with his strong nationalist views, being an important, and influential role-model for Robespierre. It is said that Robespierre slept with a copy of Rousseau’s Social Contract next to him (Halsall). Rousseau thought that it was the greatest of all sins to continue in life when one believes there is a better way (Searle). Robespierre knew there was another way; a republic, free of the uncaring rule of powerful monarchs. This idea may have encouraged Robespierre to press for reformation at all costs.

Twenty thousand to forty thousand died; it is still unknown exactly how many people were lost through the blood drenching event of the Reign of Terror.[Footnote] Throughout the French revolution, specifically the eleven month, 1793-1794 Reign of Terror, revolutionary leaders, such as Maximilien Robespierre believed in enforcing fear to resolve the instability of France. “Terror is nothing else than swift, severe, indomitable justice; it flows, then, from virtue”-Maximilien Robespierre.[Footnote] This period in history signified great atrocities of massacres, and a time where fear was evoked within every French civilian. The National Convention of France was a great factor in encouraging the start of the Reign of Terror; they continued on

In this essay I shall try to find whether the Terror was inherent from the French revolutions outset or was it the product of exceptional circumstances. The French revolution is the dividing line between the Ancien Regime and the modern world. After France the hierarchy that societies of the time had been founded on began to change and they began to sweep away the intricate political structures of absolute monarchy, but however to achieve this was the Terror absolutely necessary? And was it planned/ or was it just the extraordinary circumstances, which the French had lead themselves into once they had deposed of Louis the

“Virtue, without which terror is destructive; terror, without which virtue is impotent” (Zizek). Maximilien Robespierre said this in a speech when people were starting to question his judgment. He believed that to be only virtuous was difficult, and without some terror added in, the world would go into turmoil as no one would follow their leader. A leader has to be strong and forceful, and sometimes even terrifying to get their point across, or to get people to follow them. Robespierre always wanted what was best for France and was willing to do anything to get it, even if that meant causing harm to the people of France. He felt that as long as the outcome of his hard work came with the results he wanted,