Robespierre gave his "On Political Morality" speech in 1794 to justify the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. He argued that political virtue cannot exist without terror, and that a balance of virtue and terror is necessary for leadership. The ongoing war in Vendee showed resistance to the new republic and convinced Robespierre that force was needed to ensure peace. However, the author believes freedom cannot coexist with terror, and that Robespierre's position is not justified.

1. Reply A Khush
The speech Robespierre gave in February 1794 was in the
context of reign of terror which was a revolutionary war, and it
is also mentioned in the book how this terror was one of the
worst experience French people have faces, “the terror hardly
touched many parts of France, but overall, the experience was
undeniably traumatic”. Robespierre gave his speech to justify
the terror and he proposed hoe each citizen has the right to be
armed to be able to defend the freedom for the country. The
nature of the war in vendee was turned into a bloody and
prolonged civil war as mentioned in the book, this could have
conflicted with Robespierre speech in a way that everyone was
allowed to be armed and due to that thousands of people got
shot and it became so deadly. The initial thought of this was
more towards organized way. The first battle of Cholet took
place during the war in the vendee. I believe Robespierre meant
to have one undivided France, to defend principles of direct
democracy, and have equality at its highest by “political
morality” and it was important to him because his goal was to
have a peaceful enjoyment of liberty and eternal justice as his
speech was all based towards it as well. In Robespierre’s view,
the relationship between virtue and terror meant without having
a virtue, terror is very powerless and without terror, virtue is
also deadly. In my opinion, freedom and terror does not co-exist
because terror is deadly, and it not only affects people lives but
many generations and nation. There could be times when
consequences are good which balances terror and freedom
which can morally justify it but I feel terror is just not
acceptable.
Reply B River R
1. Robespierre’s speech in 1794 was all about political morality.
The context behind this is that in the preceding year the reign of
terror was happening in France, but the threat of invading
countries still loomed, and this was a big threat to the survival

2. of the revolutionary Republic. This threat was happening before
the monarchy fell so whenever the revolutionists took over, they
now had to deal with it themselves and it was an impending
stress.
2. The nature of the war could have affected Robespierre’s view
because of how force was the only way they would win, which
caused his views to change from opposing the war to realizing it
was an emergency which required severe measures to those that
opposed them
3. He saw political morality by the ways in which politics and
ats of justice are acted upon morally, this was important to him
because he wanted an equal and just France.
4. His views on terror and virtue are that you could not have
one without the other, he thought of them as balancing each
other. “Without virtue, terror is deadly; without terror virtue is
impotent.” This viewpoint is hard for me to wrap my head
around, his vision of democracy is not what it truly is and is a
very twisted way of thinking.
5. I do not think his position is justified, I think there are better
ways to handle problems other than a reign of terror, especially
if you are trying to coexist within a free state.
Discussion Thread: Ancient Religion
MANAGE DISCUSSION
This is a graded discussion: 100 points possible
due Nov 3
11 unread reply.11 reply.
In Chapters 1-3 of the course textbook, you have been studying
the role that religion played in ancient civilizations. In this
discussion, you will choose two primary source documents and
consider the similarities and differences between the religion of
the Hebrews (which has greatly influenced Western
Civilization), and another ancient religion.

3. Choose One of the Following to compare with Psalm
8: (See the
Discussion Resources section for links).
Either:
Egyptian Book of the Dead: Hymns of Praise to Ra
Or:
Incantation to Ishtar (from Mesopotamian Civilization)
Compare and contrast one of the above documents with:
Hymns of Praise to Yahweh - Psalm 8
As you read, look for points of comparison and contrast. Our
textbook editors suggest that the Hebrews drew from both
Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations (2-1), not only
practices of law and society, but also in terms of religious
beliefs, going as far as to suggest that the Hebrew people were
not truly monotheistic until Moses introduced that idea (2-2).
Your initial thread should have a clear thesis statement and
should respond to the following questions:
Comparison/Contrast: What are the most telling similarities and
differences between the two documents?
Basic analysis: What do you think of the textbook editors'
conclusions regarding Hebrew monotheism? (Use Genesis to
support your arguments)
Biblical Evaluation: Based on your own understanding of the
Bible, Christianity, and the nature of man, what reasons do you
think might account for the similarities within the texts?
(Provide specific Scriptural support)
Draw from the primary source documents and Scripture for the

4. majority of support. Use textbook and lectures for
background info only. No outside sources allowed.
Discussion Resources
·
Egyptian Book of the Dead: Hymns of Praise to
RaLinks to an external site.
·
Incantation to IshtarLinks to an external site.
·
Psalm 8Links to an external site.
·
Strong's ConcordanceLinks to an external site.
Please review the
Discussion Assignment InstructionsDownload
Discussion Assignment Instructions
Minimize File Preview
Chapters 1-3 of the course textbook, you have been studying the
role that religion played in ancient civilizations. In this
discussion, you will choose two primary source documents and
consider the similarities and differences between the religion of
the Hebrews (which has greatly influenced Western
Civilization), and another ancient religion.
Choose One of the Following to compare with Psalm 8: (See the
Discussion Resources section for links).
Either:
Egyptian Book of the Dead: Hymns of Praise to Ra
Or:
Incantation to Ishtar (from Mesopotamian Civilization)

5. Compare and contrast one of the above documents with:
Hymns of Praise to Yahweh - Psalm 8
As you read, look for points of comparison and contrast. Our
textbook editors suggest that the Hebrews drew from both
Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations (2-1), not only
practices of law and society, but also in terms of religious
beliefs, going as far as to suggest that the Hebrew people were
not truly monotheistic until Moses introduced that idea (2-2).
Your initial thread should have a clear thesis statement and
should respond to the following questions:
Comparison/Contrast: What are the most telling similarities and
differences between the two documents?
Basic analysis: What do you think of the textbook editors'
conclusions regarding Hebrew monotheism? (Use Genesis to
support your arguments)
Biblical Evaluation: Based on your own understanding of the
Bible, Christianity, and the nature of man, what reasons do you
think might account for the similarities within the texts?
(Provide specific Scriptural support)
Draw from the primary source documents and Scripture for the
2
ON POLITICAL MORALITY SPEECH ANALYSIS 2

6. On Political Morality Speech Analysis
The Author’s Full Names
Where the Author Goes to University
The course’s title and number
The Author’s Professor
When the Assignment is Due
On Political Morality Speech Analysis
At the time Maximilien Robespierre was giving his
On Political Morality speech, he was on the ropes
(Johnson, 2019). The new republic had yet to achieve its ideal
state after toppling the monarchy. They had anticipated a
republic of liberty, equality, and fraternity but were on the
verge of a huge divide. France was still in the middle of the
Reign of Terror, which involved a series of executions and
massacres, which kept the republic on edge (Johnson, 2019).
The wars of the Vendee were also ongoing and threatened peace
in the region.
The war in the Vendee showed that there was resistance to

7. the republic in France. When toppling the monarchy, most of
France was united and this made the revolution swift and
successful (Robespierre, 1794). The war in Vendee showed the
resilience and resolve of those opposed to the republic and
helped to convince Robespierre that in the absence of terror, the
republic would fail. It showed the need for force to ensure
peace in the republic.
Robespierre defines political morality as the need for
balance between virtue and terror as necessary for leadership.
Robespierre argues that in politics, virtue cannot exist in the
absence of terror (Robespierre, 1794). Political morality is
important to Robespierre because it provides a justification for
his actions in the Vendee wars and the terror. It helps to justify
his actions and show that his actions were politically moral.
Robespierre argues that both virtue and terror are
necessary. He states that the relationship between virtue and
terror is that terror is justice which is inflexible and severe and
can be misunderstood as cruelty. However, this form of justice
finds its origin in virtue and is necessary for the growth of the
state (Robespierre, 1794).
Robespierre presents an interesting perspective, where he
argues that freedom and terror have to co-exist for the success
of a republic. However, I do not believe that his position is
justified. I believe that freedom is the absence of terror and a
society that allows the coexistence of freedom and terror is
bound to prejudice and eventual decline.
References
Johnson, S. M. (2019). Robespierre: A Self-Destructed
Revolutionary.
Robespierre, M. (1794, February). On political morality. In
speech to the Convention.