Robespierre’s view of Political Morality and Accountability

Maximilien Robespierre was an idealistic philosopher. He believed in democratic governance and was greatly influenced by the concepts introduced by Jean Jacques Rousseau, namely the “General Will”. (ROUSSEAU, 1762) Robespierre claimed, “the characteristic of a popular government is confidence in the people and severity towards itself” (ROBESPIERRE, 1794). In other words, Robespierre’s conclusion is that a non-corrupt government has to trust its electorate as well as be strict and severe in enforcing internal discipline.

Robespierre arrives at this conclusion because of a number of factors. First of all, he subscribes to the view of equality for all. He is, in the context of the time period, a true libertarian. This is why he believes that the government must be strict towards itself. The aim of this idea is to prevent an aristocracy or another monarch from developing.

He also speaks about the government being severe towards itself. Robespierre certainly expects factions to arise within government that aim at derailing the principles at the core of the republic. He is saying that if this is to occur, government must be severe in punishing those involved in the movement.

Robespierre view is that if found guilty of corruption, the punishment is ultimately execution. He claims that corrupt officials are the allies of the enemies of the revolution and should be punished with the same level of severity. This is an interesting statement because what Robespierre is saying is that the government needs to hold itself accountable for internal actions that go against the core principals on which it was founded.

Robespierre also speaks about the confidence that the government should have in its people. This trust should arise out of the relationship that the people have with their government. The people elect a government that has a shared respect for the “General Will” (ROUSSEAU, 1762) and “virtues” (ROBESPIERRE, 1794) of the society. The government should have nothing to fear from the people as they have shared interests.

If on the other hand the government did not trust the people, it would be because their interests were not shared. This lack of trust would arise out of conscience and suspicion on the governments behalf; officials knowingly violating the principles that the society was build on and worrying about the consequences of such actions. Upon observing the lack of trust, one could assume that the government was not being strict in enforcing the values of the society and is ultimately corrupted on some front.

In conclusion, Robespierre’s claim can be looked at as a model for a healthy political system. A political system governed by the strict enforcement of law where officials are held accountable for corrupt actions. The lack of trust in the electorate on the government’s behalf should serve as a marker of a failed or failing state.

List of References:

· ROBESPIERRE, M, 1794. Second Treatise on Government.

· ROUSSEUA, JJ, 1762. On the Moral and Political Principles of Domestic Policy.