The Terror was not simply the moment at which the French government unleashed its violence against its own people. The Terror, as it was seen during the Revolution itself, was rather a way by which one chose to think; it was, in essence, a rejection of monarchy and a willingness to proclaim full separation from the former rulers of the nation. This notion was perceived as an effort to intimidate the upper classes to enforce a new ideological era, not simply to employ physical violence against suspicious individuals. When Robespierre famously proclaimed that virtue and terror needed to be combined during the French Revolution, his message was not intended to be a justification of outright cruelty, but instead a compelling commentary on precisely how intimidation needed be used to threaten the royalist ideology. Indeed, while this was the valid historical use of the term, many abused its connotations and took it upon themselves to officiate a barbarous corporeal war against the French Republic’s supposed
The Terror was not simply the moment at which the French government unleashed its violence against its own people. The Terror, as it was seen during the Revolution itself, was rather a way by which one chose to think; it was, in essence, a rejection of monarchy and a willingness to proclaim full separation from the former rulers of the nation. This notion was perceived as an effort to intimidate the upper classes to enforce a new ideological era, not simply to employ physical violence against suspicious individuals. When Robespierre famously proclaimed that virtue and terror needed to be combined during the French Revolution, his message was not intended to be a justification of outright cruelty, but instead a compelling commentary on precisely how intimidation needed be used to threaten the royalist ideology. Indeed, while this was the valid historical use of the term, many abused its connotations and took it upon themselves to officiate a barbarous corporeal war against the French Republic’s supposed