Did Rousseau Supply an Endorsement for The Terror of the French Revolution?

Abstract

Every revolution has its philosopher, and the name of Jean-Jacques Rousseau was certainly invoked during the heady days of the French Revolution, days often connected to the abuses of the Terror. Thus, Rousseau's political philosophy has been lamented as the prototype for atrocities committed under the auspices of Robespierre. The Terror was clearly brutal and arbitrary, and Rousseau did suggest that recalcitrants might be "forced to be free." Combining this with the fact that Robespierre and his followers claimed Rousseau's endorsement for their policies, completes the proposition connecting Rousseau's theory with the practice of revolutionary terror.

I assail this position on two levels. First, I argue that Rousseau qualified his punitive allowances, in ways neglected by revolutionary terrorists. Second, I contend that Robespierre and his followers, even though claiming Rousseauist inspiration, significantly misinterpreted Rousseau's doctrine on at least ten counts; primarily in terms of the structure, purpose and instruments of a legitimate government.

In the end, I present a view of Rousseau more politically conservative than is generally argued. The thesis will show that Rousseau would have condemned, rather than posthumously endorsed, the practice of revolutionary terror. My position is augmented by noting Rousseau's advice to the Poles and Corsicans. That Robespierre and those of a similar ilk neglected these readily available works, focusing rather upon the abstractions of the Social Contract, resulted in an inadequate perception of Rousseau the practician. Rousseau may have been too inclined to paradox. He may have been utopian and arguably paranoid. But he was not the theoretical architect of the Terror.