Robespierre believed that changes in the government were necessary to protect the ideals of the French Revolution and to ensure the establishment of a democratic republic based on virtue and justice. He viewed the existing political structures as corrupt and insufficient to achieve the revolutionary goals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. By instituting radical reforms and a more centralized authority, he aimed to eliminate counter-revolutionary threats and promote the common good, believing that such measures were essential for the survival of the republic.
Robespierre believed that terror was necessary to protect the Revolution and its ideals from internal and external threats. He argued that a strong, centralized authority was essential to safeguard the gains of the Revolution and to eliminate counter-revolutionary forces. By using terror, he aimed to instill fear and ensure compliance among citizens, thereby promoting virtue and the common good. Ultimately, he viewed it as a means to achieve a more just and egalitarian society.
It's a reasonably self-evident assertion. So far, there's never been a government that didn't to some extent, sooner or later, abuse at least some of its citizens; since the task of a government is to protect its citizens, this makes government "evil". Yet there's never been a human society which managed to function without government, which seems to make it "necessary". Thus, a necessary evil.
Absolutely not. Robespierre was instrumental in the king's execution. Though, come to think of it, they ended up on the same side - the wrong side of the guillotine. Actually, both sides of the guillotine.
A famous quote from Thomas Paine reflects what his thoughts were on this subject. He said "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intollerable one."
Maximilien Robespierre had complex views on Jean-Paul Marat and Georges Danton. He admired Marat's fervor and commitment to revolutionary ideals, viewing him as a key ally in the fight against counter-revolutionaries. However, Robespierre became increasingly wary of Danton, perceiving him as too moderate and potentially compromising the Revolution's radical goals. Ultimately, this tension led to a political rift, with Robespierre advocating for more extreme measures while distancing himself from both men.
He felt if he did this, it would advantage him politically.
He felt if he did this, it would advantage him politically.
He felt if he did this, it would advantage him politically.
He felt if he did this, it would advantage him politically.
He felt if he did this, it would advantage him politically.
If there was no government then there would be no laws and policies, no peace and harmony. That's why we need government.
i dont know what other ppl think of him but i think he was a heartless butcher who killed tons of ppl. if there's something we dont need it's a modern day robespierre.
Because ten they would be bossing around.
Because ten they would be bossing around.
Robespierre believed that terror was necessary to protect the Revolution and its ideals from internal and external threats. He argued that a strong, centralized authority was essential to safeguard the gains of the Revolution and to eliminate counter-revolutionary forces. By using terror, he aimed to instill fear and ensure compliance among citizens, thereby promoting virtue and the common good. Ultimately, he viewed it as a means to achieve a more just and egalitarian society.
I think that most business have problems when the stability of the governemnt changes because so I think it most of the stability government will affect the business
Maximilien Robespierre was one and I think Louis Sanit-something was a leader too