The Reign of terror was a significant event during the French Revolution where violence and conflict were familiarised by the citizens due to their protests to live in an anti-revolutionary country. In other words, for their voices to be heard and their values to be acknowledged without the King’s authority with the acts of protest, attacks and invasions. This event was one of the factors that also contributed to France shifting to a democratic system. It allowed an individual to take full power of not just the governments but the country itself- Maximilien Robespierre. Many neighbouring countries of France were forced to take action and intervene with this horrific period that occurred throughout history between 1792-1795.
France declaring …show more content…
He had enough power to execute anyone to the guillotine that outspoken him or were against his theories taking into consideration that through his high position was capable of acting on his ideals and did this by enacting the Reign of Terror. When he spoke of his ideals against the Revolution towards the public, they were captivated by his passion and thus, Robespierre was a representation of all the voices that had been silenced. It is estimated that around 25,000 deaths occurred due to the opposing of Robespierre’s political beliefs and views- many who had no legal defence. He also had the capacity to disallow the King a trial and placed a case for execution arguing that the monarchy had been downfalling due to the Revolution. As a consequence, members of the Convention disagreed with Robespierre and suggested that the King should have the chance to defend himself and vote for acquittal. Unfortunately, all the 693 Deputies were in favour of the King guilty while no one had voted for acquittal. In other words, an acquittal was a judgement that a person is not guilty of the crime in which they have been charged with. If Robespierre had enough power to put the king on execution without a trial, emphasises the potential he had and the ability to persuade others to follow his policies on the Revolution. Moreover, he went to the extent of killing his fellow companions such as Danton in order for personal gain and then to yield all the power.This won him a reputation especially towards the sans-culottes including a democrat for the lowest social classes such as the poor and the slaves within the colonies. When he was warned and threatened by the risks of acting upon counter-revolution, he
France declaring …show more content…
He had enough power to execute anyone to the guillotine that outspoken him or were against his theories taking into consideration that through his high position was capable of acting on his ideals and did this by enacting the Reign of Terror. When he spoke of his ideals against the Revolution towards the public, they were captivated by his passion and thus, Robespierre was a representation of all the voices that had been silenced. It is estimated that around 25,000 deaths occurred due to the opposing of Robespierre’s political beliefs and views- many who had no legal defence. He also had the capacity to disallow the King a trial and placed a case for execution arguing that the monarchy had been downfalling due to the Revolution. As a consequence, members of the Convention disagreed with Robespierre and suggested that the King should have the chance to defend himself and vote for acquittal. Unfortunately, all the 693 Deputies were in favour of the King guilty while no one had voted for acquittal. In other words, an acquittal was a judgement that a person is not guilty of the crime in which they have been charged with. If Robespierre had enough power to put the king on execution without a trial, emphasises the potential he had and the ability to persuade others to follow his policies on the Revolution. Moreover, he went to the extent of killing his fellow companions such as Danton in order for personal gain and then to yield all the power.This won him a reputation especially towards the sans-culottes including a democrat for the lowest social classes such as the poor and the slaves within the colonies. When he was warned and threatened by the risks of acting upon counter-revolution, he