Overall, Brutus and the conspiracy had no justified reasons to kill Caesar. They only assumed and thought what Caesar might do. Brutus feared that Caesar would have too much power and feared what would happen to Rome. None of the conspirators talked to Caesar in person what his plan was if he got crowned. Brutus thought Caesar would manipulate the people of Rome, when he was manipulated himself, which caused the death of his best friend.
This not only muffled the voices of the people and robbed the freedom they graciously fought the monarchy for, but also encrypted fear and distrust in the French government. Robespierre had begun to execute leaders around the country in July 26, 1794 after a fear emitting speech announcing his paranoia of conspiring supporters. After this speech, anti-revolutionists and pro revolutionists alike were filled to the brink with panic. The Reign of Terror was not justified because it is not right to have an entire country in distress and constantly fearing the government that was put in place to be moral and
So what was the point of the war if in the end he was murder and they ended up losing everything. It doesn’t make sense why they killed, because someone didn’t want to be Christian. Maybe they had their own religion. So to me it looks like the war was for nothing because even nowadays they are many different religions out there and everyone has their own opinion about religions. I do see even now if you’re not a Christian you get treated differently.
Death or being sent to a labor camp, such as Gulag, was the fate of most. From 1936 to 1938, people were being killed over paranoia and no actual evidence. The purges were aimed to efface the threat of political retaliation. The Blood Purges were a time of paranoia, brutality and terror. Russian citizens were forced to admit to crimes they may or may not have committed.
It is not that suicide bombers obey leadership or that they are pressured to terrorise. But their acts are a reaction to political oppression and the belief that their natural rights have been walkover on or unheard. For example, because life under military occupation is really humiliating, people believe that they will find a better afterlife. Several theorists write about the Palestinian suicide bombers and they argue that the suicide bomber was unable to express his citizen individuality while he was being held under occupation and also being unable to serve his society in constructive ways, So he just turned to a goal unheard of in this world." In short, he comes to believe that he has a Godly mission to struggle against the group's enemies and achieve its political goals in the name of the lord.
The French fought wars for economic power and territory while the Iroquois did not prioritize this. Because of this, the missionaries’ natural conclusion was that it was an attack on the French people and their faith. The martyrdom of Brebeuf was perceived very differently between the Iroquois and the French because of the knowledge or lack of knowledge that they held at the time of the event. The Iroquois tribe viewed this event as a traditional Mourning War and as trying to fill the needs of their tribe while the French missionaries saw it as an intentional attack on their faith and their mission. The disconnect in these two narratives added additional tension to an already difficult situation between the two groups.
In Fahrenheit 451, the truth is dealt with differently as the government has illegalised literature and writing. They propose that literature contains too much emotion and can therefore upset readers or cause controversy. Although the government wants people to be happy, their underlying motive is for the public to be dim-witted, vacuous and institutionalised. Literature contains all the ideas that oppose what they want in their people, such as art, science, religion, philosophy and natural beauty, so they forbid it and employ firemen to burn every book. The government in Fahrenheit 451 does not believe in the aesthetic and creative value of books, but instead that it is a source of material that can
During that time, about 20,000 people were killed by the guillotine. To many this is a major tragedy. I do not think the Reign of Terror was justified. Simply because of these three points; they threatened with unnecessary force, secondly, they used fear as a controlling device and lastly, their actions don 't add up to their reasons. The first reason the Reign of Terror was not justified is that they used unnecessary force.
The Reign of Terror began in 1793 and ended in July of 1794. There was a total of 14,000 people executed by use of the guillotine, firing squad, and other methods. During this time period, the country of France was in total and constant chaos; they were being attacked by Prussian and Austrian troops, and their economy was a disaster. Utilizing terror as an instrument of the French Revolution had the advantages of making the people of France brave in any moment of action, but the number of deaths, the economic decline, and the fact that innocent people were killed made the large amount of disadvantages of the technique outweighs the
The rules in Anthem include the word I being destroyed and erased from history being replace by us and we. Anyone who says I will be killed. The government was made with good intentions but eventually it was corrupted. The government originally wanted everyone to be completely equal means that they took the will of the people. Other rules include men not being allowed to be alone, two people not being allowed to be alone, Men and women not being able to speak with each other on a personal level, You can’t have any friends The word ego is the most important word, Writing stuff is not allowed unless the consul allows it and everything that is not listed is forbidden.
The ‘Reign of Terror’ was not justified because the it took away the rights that the French government had achieved during French Revolution. One piece of evidence for this was that during the reign of terror the French people had no freedom of religion. A detail that supports this was the fact that during the Reign of Terror, people were not allowed to practise any religion, especially Christianity. The revolutionary government damaged churches, abolished Sunday worship, and the holidays of Christmas and Easter. The third estate could be helped by practising Christianity and keep positive.
The committee of public safety had many goals but the main goal was to protect the revolution from its enemies. enemies being nobles and other nearby monarchies. robespierre was the leader of the committee of public safety and he was over achieving in preserving the revolution and doing so caused him a lot of enemies and not many friends due to executing anyone suspicious of being against the revolution. even innocent people were executed which made completely impossible to be alive and against the revolution in france. the committee of public safety were effectively protecting the revolution.
The U.S. refused put the liberating of the concentration and death camps in the forefront of their priorities and instead refused to help at all. When the War Refugee Board asked the Secretary of War to help the camps by bombing the gas chambers, crematoria or even the railway to the camps, the U.S. came up with an excuse that “such [a] doubtful efficacy would not warrant the use of our resources”. The U.S. did not help not because they didn’t have the resources but because they didn’t get any gain from trying to save thousands of lives. The Holocaust is considered one of the worst mass crimes in human history. The U.S. should have done so much more in an effort to try and stop the atrocities that where happening and yet they did not.
Louis XIV had turned France into becoming an extremely hierarchical society with the king at the top and then looking down on everyone else. (Harvey 473). He was really against the ideas that a person could be put into jail simply on the fact that the king wanted him there, without any evidence against them and without any opportunity of a fair trial. Voltaire was also against a government under which people in jail were forced to confess of possible false guilt due to unimaginable torture. (Voltaire 10).
James’ personality alienated the political nation; to such an extent that it was not divided over opinion, but completely rejected him. So his authority collapsed completely. It is clear that the restoration settlement did little to provide stability in England. However I think this would be expected in the earlier years of the restoration, as there were no rules or protocol to follow, in the event of the monarch being executed and later restored. However the latter period was much more about a fear of catholic succession of James.