Was Robespierre & the Radicals justified in their use of violence to create a better society? Robespierre and the Radicals were not justified in their use of violence to create a better society because it was not effective on the long run, killed many people and resulted in a worse government situation that emulated the government and equality rights of the Old Regime. During the Reign of Terror, Robespierre and the Radicals wanted everyone in France to have equal rights and support the non-monarch, republican democracy government. Robespierre and the Jacobins were completely against the Old Regime of France, estates unbalanced in rights and absolute monarchies. Robespierre had a rough childhood with his mother dieing at a young age, …show more content…
Robespierre’s once said “any law which violates the inalienable rights of man is essentially unjust and tyrannical; it is not a law at all”, which is completely hypocritical. It is hypocritical because Robespierre passed the Law of Suspects which violated the Declaration of Rights of Man, especially the right saying that everyone has freedom to speak, write and print what they want. The Law of Suspects made everyone have to agree with the Republican Democracy and permitted people from having the freedom to state their opinion, especially if they were against the revolution. Robespierre tried his best and succeeded so that the Third Estate could have equal rights because they make up most of the population and he create a society revolved around them and removed the monarchy. But when he did this and forced the revolution among France and their citizens, he did what the First and Second Estate did to the Third Estate during the Old Regime, he didn’t let the people who supported monarchs have any rights and to an even worse extent, he killed them all! Robespierre ended up having infinite power of the people and was overthrown and executed, resulting in a situation similar to the Old Regime (ruled by the middle class and gave power to people of property), called the