Just a reminder that this guy did nothing wrong

He was the biggest 'counter-revolutionary' of them all, senpai, the Jacobins tossed out the church and the King. It was also his belicose rhetoric and refusal to compromise that created the Terror. He was just lucky enough to have the sans-culottes onside for a time, who were little more than violent LARPers controlling Paris. Dude was a psychopath and it was unfortunate he was not consumed by his own idiocy earlier desu

I've studied the subject at length and I genuinely don't know who else was left other than the Jacobins after they scrubbed themselves clean of the Girondins. I thought after a certain point (say, the beginning of the Legislative Assembly) it was just the Jacobins eating themselves and screeching autistically over how the whites in the countryside indicated broad-stroke dissent with the changes of the revolution

How is, albeit forcebly, trying to nivelate the society counter-revolutionairy?

Monarchists for example?

The Jacobins' (and ostensibly; his) attempt at making things nice and 'even' via the Civil Contsitution of the Clergy managed to lose him the support of the Clergy and the Pope, who denounced the new constitution and obviously pulled a lot of devout catholics away from the cause. A tenant of actual counter-revolutionaries (and also non-jacobins) was that the revolution was against god and sought to abolish/replace roman catholicism with the cult of reason/cult of the supreme being.

Monarchists were only present in the GA. After the King's flight to Varennes it was a slow decline in representation, and after the white revolution in the countryside they were implicitly banned/hunted as counter-revolutionaries. Even based heroes of the original revolution like Lafayette had to flee for fear of being deemed the new Counter-Revolutionary. By the time the terror (which ya'boi R*bespierre also engineered) kicked in, there were none left with any say.

I don't really want to argue this further because it is apparent that in the retreat of the first estate who supported the egalitarian nature of the revolution, and in the careless abolition of the church, that the Jacobins were basically searching for the next tall poppy to cut for the sake of it, catering to the bloodthirsty baying masses in Paris. They had no concept or concern for the rest of France.

Citoyens, vouliez-vous une révolution sans révolution?

>Using "it's just part of the eventual process bro, don't mind the lives we could have saved or the things we should have done better to improve the country as a whole" as an argument

This is maoist-tier malarkey desu.

>Implying that it's possible to have a revolution and a stable country afterwards without using some form of terror.

>

His wants were unironically the wants of the Republic. Nigga was irrcorruptible

>Girondins
Said the dumb fucks who were starting shit they couldn't finish

How is this an argument?

Not him desu but the germans and austrians and prussians all had peaceful reform of their governments

the British in particular had massive amounts of reform that avoided the need for it desu

>tfw I only know that particular snip of fact and not a dot of evidence to back it up

I think they decentralised more power to the house of commons, but I can't be sure. Maybe Englishhistory fags could tell me more

desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu desu

If France never invaded other countries in the first place, it might not have be so destabilized that Robesippre needed to implement the Terror.

No one loves armed missionaries

>implying that they were already reforming shit until some retard ran away

You can't compare the amount of power the English king had with that of the Ancien Regime.

Desu