While many may be outraged by Robespierre’s actions, he believed they were justified because the killed enemies of the Revolution by terror with the Republic in mind. In his mind the mass executions were justified, since he had the right reason for doing so and was trying to protect the republic. In this second source, we can see that Robespierre and others, will use any means necessary to protect their beliefs and eliminate any threats to those beliefs. Robespierre put the fear into people that they would be killed if they opposed the Revolution in anyway. One last act of terrorism that I looked at occurred in New York City, on September 11, 2011. In the time before George W. Bush gives his speech to Congress, the Berlin wall falls and the …show more content…
In Johannes Julius’ letter we get a firsthand account of the brutal torture in the witch hunts. The witch hunts were conducted by people who were afraid of the idea that people could intentionally acquire abilities. They believed that the only way to suppress their fear was to round up as many witches as possible and execute them. In Robespierre’s Report of the Principles of Public Morality he justifies the terror and execution of thousands as necessary for the protection of the Republic in France. Finally, in George W. Bush’s speech to Congress he condemns al-Qaeda for their attacks on the United States in order to “disrupt and end a way of life” and condemns terrorist everywhere. In each source, there is force of people that seeks to achieve their goals through acts of terror. I think what’s important to learn from reading these sources is that terrorism is never acceptable or a means to achieve our desires. Each of these sources describe a disastrous scene as a result of the actions some people took. While Robespierre was trying to protect the republic of France, people were afraid of witches, and al-Qaeda saw the United Sates as an enemy, killing thousands of people was not the right solution in any of these cases. You cannot simply kill people for a belief or fear that you have, it’s never justified. As Bush points out in his speech, “No one should be singled out for unfair treatment or unkind words because of their ethnic background or religious faith.” I think these sources show us that acts of terrorism during these different times never achieved the goals of those carrying out the executions. There are more peaceful methods that can be employed to reach our goals, instead of destructive acts of
In 1789, the French people began to stand up to their current monarchical government in order to obtain rights and laws that they felt they deserved. The Reign of Terror followed after the Revolution and seemed to stand for the complete opposite of what the people had previously stood up for. The Reign of Terror began in 1793 and ended in 1794 due to the decapitation of Maximilien Robespierre. The Reign of Terror can be explained as a time period in France when many counter revolutionaries were killed because of their traditional beliefs. Counter revolutionaries believed in preserving the ways of the monarchy, but since the majority of people thought otherwise, these opposing beliefs led to death. The French government did not have good reason to conduct such drastic measures against those who challenged the Revolution.
Liberty, equality, and freedom are all essential parts to avoiding anarchy and maintaining tranquility even through the most treacherous of times. The Reign of Terror is well known as the eighteen month long French Revolution (1793-1794). In this period of time, a chief executive Maximilien Robespierre and a new French government executed gigantic numbers of people they thought to be enemies of the revolution; inside and outside of the country. The question is; were these acts of the new French government justified? Not only are the acts that occurred in the Reign of Terror not justified, they were barbaric and inhumane.
The French Revolution, beginning in 1789, was a lengthy process in which the people of France took over the government and instituted a Republic (Chambers). The overarching goal of the Revolution was to place the power of government in the hands of the people. For two years, whilst France was facing internal disorganization and external wartime threats, the government was run by a war dictatorship under Maximilien Robespierre, the head of the Committee of Public Safety (“Reign of Terror”). Amid much internal suspicion and fear, the Reign of Terror began. Much of France was politically divided, and Robespierre’s method for keeping the government stable in a time of crisis involved severe penalties for any suspected of plotting against the new government (Chambers). Soon the accusations began to fly and a handful of people convicted and killed for treason became thousands. Many of the cases turned into the accuser’s word versus the accused, and a government preoccupied with bigger issues often did not care to look into these cases, simply convicting the accused, supposedly to promote a sense of unity and control to the citizens of France, and to forewarn anyone who did attempt treasonous deeds (Chambers). Eventually, Marie Antoinette, guilty of no crime other than marrying the former king, was executed on the grounds of treason (“French Revolution: The Reign of Terror”). Many thought this was taking a step too far. The former Queen was well-respec...
Alan Dershowitz challenges the legitimization of non-lethal torture in his essay, “Should the Ticking Bomb Terrorist be tortured?” He claims that torture should indeed be legitimized for specific scenarios that require such action. The ticking bomb terrorist gives the example of a terrorist withholding time-sensitive information that could result in the death of innocent citizens, if not shared. Not only does Dershowitz challenge the idea of torture, but he also gives a probable solution that favors the legitimization the torture. He mentions three values that would have to be complied with by all three branches of government if it were to be legitimated, which Dershowitz does endorse. The arguments of the two perspectives discussed in the
The horrendous acts of the Jacobin leaders during the Reign of Terror led to many unfortunate deads and crimes. Robespierre was a power hungry tyrant, he was unforgiving. He killed Louis and thousands of others because he had become paranoid. His proposal of Republic of Virtue left the people hungry and angry. He also tried to protect the revolution but the plan backfired. All together, these horrible acts prove that the tyrants were extremely power hungry and blood
Do the actions ever justify the end result? The Reign of Terror, the revolution lead by Maximilien Robespierre, began on January 21, 1793 when King Louis XVI and his wife were guillotined due to the way they had led the government into a financial crisis and as a result when Robespierre took over with his radical new government 20,000-40,000 people were brutally executed. So was this radical period in France really necessary or was it just mass killings with little progress. The Reign of terror was not justified because of the threats against the revolution, the methods used by the revolution were not justified, and the ideals of the revolution were not justified.
The French Revolution is arguably the bloodiest period in French history, with men such as Maximilien Robespierre leading the country into a situation of state sponsored terror. Originally being quite a liberal thinker inspired by the works of Rousseau, Robespierre quickly gained a reputation for being a radical throughout the course of the Revolution, especially during the Terror. Early on terror was justified as a means to root out foreign and domestic enemies of the Revolution, however; once the foreign threat had been taken care of it became increasingly difficult for Robespierre to rationalize his use of terror to bring about a supposed Republic of Virtue. In his speech, the “Justification of the use of Terror” which he presented to the National Convention, he attempted to defend the actions of the Terror one last time. Unfortunately it appeared that Robespierre was going to become the very type of tyrant that he had strived to abolish along with the French Monarchy at the beginning of the Revolution. As demonstrated in the speech, Robespierre had become obsessed with ridding France of her enemies, however; his fixation with the Terror, even when it had become unnecessary, eventually caused the rest of the radicals to envision a France without him – and it cost him his life.
The French revolution was a significantly dangerous time period because of the chaos and conflict that took place in the streets France, resulting in the mass slaughter of thousands of innocent people. Within the revolution, there were many characters who took part in resolving the conflicts that had arisen. One thing that sparked the revolution was the shortage of food caused by a drought which lead to the bread prices going up since most were too poor to afford food at the new price people started revolting against their government in hopes to be heard and treated fairly while many were still dying of hunger. Within the revolution, there were figures such as George Danton, Jean Bailly and Reine Audu who contributed in the development and
The Jacobins therefore seized control of the national convention and used it to denounce,arrest,and execute all political enemies. Due to the fanatical aspirations of men such as Danton and Robespierre,who was very radical, it would be only a matter of months before the moderate stage of social and political reform was transformed into a radical phase of barbaric and violent force. Danton and Robespierre used Mara as a face of the saint jacobs club since he was typically a great friend to the people to justify their actions of killing Louis XIV and Marie Antoinette along with their children and 40,000 others with the guillotine to stop anyone thought to support the counter revolution. Robespierre wrote “Justification of the Use of Terror” to inform the people that terror is necessary to weed out anyone would opposes the republic. The radical forces were able to gain the support of the citizens in declaring that the constitution of 1791 was ineffective and useless since it did not suit the needs of ALL the population of France. The declaration of the rights of man and of citizen did not include women, slaves, and minorities as well as not giving any specific shape to the government
Although, the Reign of Terror was seen as a way to let the revolution live and was well supported it was not justified. Because the internal threats propagated radicalism, the external threats raged and became stronger, and the methods became chaotic the Reign of Terror extended its stay in France until the death of the powerful leader Robespierre. The Reign of Terror was an outreach to gain rights but during this period they were taken away until the fateful day of Robespierre’s death ending the Terror.
...he government we support. Law enforcers in Salem used preemptive technique by condemning and executing those who came under suspicion of witchcraft without real evidence. Our former president’s policy, the “Bush Doctrine,” condemned people without concrete evidence or giving them fair trials. Iraq was invaded and searched, but no weapons of mass destruction ever found. With adequate amount of fear and suspicion, the government will launch potentially devastating “preemptive war” on suspected aggressors. In The Crucible, every time one witch confesses many more appear, just as international aggression by U.S. forces breeds more international aggressors. What does our fetish for the aggressive repression of our enemies say about society and of what we learn from history? Are we incapable learning from our mistakes, or are we just addicted to hatred and violence?
Freedom is a critical part of any society - without freedom citizens tend to become unhappy and no longer want to associate with their government. However the same goes for order; no order means anarchy and anarchy means that the people will want to disassociate with the community. In Lord of the Flies by William Golding, a group of boys crash land on an uninhabited island in the Pacific in the midst of war and must establish a functioning society based on what little they know about government from civilized life. A new society as had to be formed during the French Revolution, also by people with limited political experience. They based their new government off of Enlightenment ideas that would ensure them their natural rights: life, liberty,
The search for terrorist groups affected many people's lives nowadays. Terrorism has a huge impact in many people's lives including the lives of every one of us now. The kind of punishment that had been used for witchcraft was the hanging but now a days the terrorist groups like Al-qaeda punishes people that refuse to convert to their religion killing them or beheading them.(source 2). It is a very similar the punishments that they are using as the ones related to the crucible. In the play people were persecuted because they were accused for being a witch.(source 3), it was just like nowadays terrorist groups persecute the government or people that have different beliefs than them.
Another reason why some utilitarian thinkers will support torturing these suspect terrorist because law enforcement is saving American lives. On the other hand, other utilitarian thinks will condemn torturing terrorist because affects a personal moral standards to conduct themselves as a productive citizen (“The ‘ticking time bomb’ problem,” 2014). An additional reason why some utilitarian thinks condemn torturing terrorist because it provokes intense psychological pressure to reveal answers that law enforcement may want to hear that’s incorrect. Furthermore, depending on which utilitarian thinker discussing the use of torturing a terrorist, the action could be justified because it prevents further or future injury. Additionally, other utilitarian thinkers would rebuke this action because hurting another doesn’t help people that have already been injured by a terrorist
The Reign of Terror was a time during the French Revolution hundreds of thousands of people were executed by various means: guillotine, shot, and drowned. The Committee of Public Safety, lead by Maximilien de Robespierre, were in charge of these executions, and with the job of finding anti-revolutionaries forces. Many thought that what Robespierre was doing would just lead to a greater anti-revolution movement, which would in turn increase the number of executions. Others did not take action against the terror; for fear that they themselves might be executed. Those who were still loyal to the revolution saw the terror as a noble cause; they saw it as a way to rid France of anti-revolutionary forces. While the terror started as an advantage to the revolution ridding anti-revolution ideals from France it began to change in to a disadvantage; it was a disadvantage because, it showed just how radical the revolutionaries could be.