Would The Reign Of Terror Be Justified Dbq Essay

441 Words1 Page

In attempt to form a new government the French decided that they were going to do just that without anyone/anything stopping them. For years the French government had ruled and made changes without consideration for the citizens consent. However the ‘new’ government were hoping to change that. The foreigners threats didn’t require it to be justified. They wanted to make the government better and expressed their opinions harshly in order to do so. The relationship between prussia and Austria was already built. But, the government during the time was worried about the revolution growing and getting worse. (Document A) Some were concerned for Marie Antoinette’s safety. Although she was also a sister of an Austrian Ruler (Document B). The problem with the reign of terror cannot be justified even if it is almost ended. …show more content…

The problem with the threat is that they had goals of getting rid of the most celebrated holidays in the world. Christmas is the most celebrated holiday in the world and it did not deserve to get taken away. This reason alone proves that the internal threat truly did not deserve it. “No one should be silenced on account of his opinions, including his religious views and beliefs”(Doc A). The threats that were being made caused a counter revolution against the French government. Ultimately terror is not necessary and went too far. This could have been dealt with very differently, and done it peacefully instead of going as far as the persecutions did and one leader can justify what maximillien did. He took advantage of his role and proposed extremity with it. The French government could have handled this a different way, however the citizens causing the terror upon the country are mostly to blame. They could have peacefully protested their beliefs and what they think government should have done about this

Open Document