Essay On The Reign Of Terror

One simple plan to get the King and Queen off the horse that runs our life, was overthrown into taking away all peoples power, with brutal death all around. then decide to take action? The Reign of Terror is when Robespierre decided to take the French Revolution a little bit farther to become a democracy which is a big step from absolute monarchy, so he took action instead of asking others if they even wanted a democracy. In the end he ended up failing; was it justified? The Reign of Terror was not justified. First off they took away people’s rights. Next they had so much unneeded death within the entire Reign of Terror. Finally the Citizens of France didn’t get to help make the decisions that were based on their Rights get taken from different types of people all the time. In the Reign of Terror, however, people didn’t get to prove their innocence. If someone was accused of doing …show more content…
Nobody ever said they wanted anything more that a constitutional monarchy, now Robspierre decided for them. They did not like the approach that they took in the Reign of Terror, with all the unneeded violence. The citizens never disagreed with the revolutionists because they knew that they would get killed just like all the others which was an abuse of power from Robspierre which leads to a different kind of government than he was shooting for.
Saying that the “Reign of Terror” was justified is like saying that ketchup belongs in ice cream, it doesn’t go together, just like the “Reign of Terror” and the word fairness. My arguments are the best because the focus on the most important key in this whole thing, the people. I look at this and I see that the people were treated terribly and they were treated better before had so to change it in this way just makes things worse. If someone was to try to change the government they should take in what the people want, rather than the what the person wants, and how this can contribute to all and what they