The Reign of Terror was very violent event that took place; although, people made it out to be helpful and resolve multiple issues it resulted in making many people very miserable and sad. This act that took place was not justified because the leader was self elected and not giving people the right to vote for their leader. Another example of this was people´s hopes were manipulated and misguided leading up to violence. The Reign of Terror was the third class (bourgeoisie) had started a war with the first class because they did not treat them well. The Bourgeoisie killed many of the first and second estate. ¨The leader¨ elected himself to lead the pack of killers, which wasn't the right thing many people disagreed with the Reign of Terror and …show more content…
Evidence is in Document A, because this is the first document, and the leader wanted to start it but many people did not agree, so he said okay then I am the leader and if you do not agree you will be killed. The evidence shows that the Reign of Terror was not Justified because, killing people with only hate in your bones is not justifiable. A second reason the Reign of Terror was not justified was that not everyone agreed with the Reign of Terror. In document A-C people said that they would not participate in it and if they didn't the ¨leader¨ would find them and kill them. The evidence shows that the Reign of Terror was not justified because if people don't agree with it, and don't participate, then they would get killed because they did not want to be apart of it since it was wrong. Finally, the Reign of Terror was not justified when it came to the leader electing himself. Evidence in this document A, the leader wanted to start it but many people did not agree, so he said okay I am the leader and if you don't agree you will be executed. In this regard, the Reign of Terror was not justified because if people do not agree with you that is why they don't elect you, and just electing yourself people feel that you are