The French Revolution started in 1789. It was caused by some overlapping factors that caused tension; they include things like bankruptcy of the country after taking part in the American Revolution, the fact that the people had a voice, the rise of public opinion, the raised oppositions and tension in the country. Crop yields were indigent and there was economic crisis since the crop yields were poor and the peasants were the most affected. Another cause is that the noble class did not want to be excluded from positions of power and political matters, and this heightened the agitation of the different social classes in the country (“Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution Part 1”).
King Louis XVI had ruled up to 1793, and when he died after being charged with treason, a Reign of Terror began. The primary aim of the terror was to counteract the revolution. In April 1793, the Committee of Public Safety was formed to get the Reign of Terror in full swing. It was earlier led by George Danton, who tried to rule using peaceful measures to no avail. In July the same year, the committee was reconstructed with Maximilien Robespierre as the leader (“Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution Part 1”). He was a determined leader who believed that the end would justify the means, and he knew that he had to do what it took to stop the revolution. Anyone who questioned his rule was eliminated.
Terror would not be a legitimate revolutionary tactic even if it were used for the benefit of the country. First, terror in itself does not promote peace, so it is not a legitimate way to use terror because there is no way terror would help in bringing peace.
Secondly, terror would also result in the death of many innocent people because during such moments; there is no trial for people heard to speak against such tactics, and they would be automatically eliminated. During the reign of terror, anyone speaking negatively towards this tactic, would immediately face the guillotine or sent to jail without even being sent to trial (“Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution Part 2”). Many people were sent to the guillotine or the National razor as it was called and some were sent to prison, and they eventually died there. This was not the way to end the revolution. Instead, it would just increase the tension. In the end, there would be no peace at all.
Thirdly, the method of using terror to stop the Revolution was a weak one because despite the actions that were taken by the Committee of Public Safety and the National Convention under the rule of Robespierre, there was still tension within the country because it gave more reason for the revolution to take place and the Revolution did not end. In the reign of terror, even the committee members felt that it was time to terminate the terror since it did not solve anything. The main mastermind of this tactic, Maximilien Robespierre, was also arrested and sent to the guillotine just like he sent other people like George Danton, who tried to oppose him. He became the final victim of his bloody reign of terror. One could also argue that because Robespierre could execute government officials who sought to fight him, it is evident to say that another adverse effect of the terror was the fact that it destabilized the government.
In conclusion, terror is not a legitimate way of ending a revolution. In such an instance, an old maxim like desperate times calls for drastic measures should not be used. It is important to take logical steps towards solving such issues, but terror is, of course, not one of them. Terror would only result in more tension and less peace hence it should be disregarded because at the end of the day it will not solve anything in the French revolution.
Works Cited
“Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution Part 1.” YouTube.com. YouTube, Sep 11, 2012. Web. Feb 25, 2016.
“Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution Part 2.” YouTube.com, Youtube, Sep 11, 2012. Web. Feb 25, 2016.
