Source one shows a quote by Maximilien Robespierre. This quote means that you cannot just pass unjust laws and consider them to be just. Robespierre was the leader of the Reign of Terror, and during the beginning of the French Revolution he believed that laws should obey fundamental rights according to this quote. Throughout the revolution however, his views changed drastically, and this is clearly shown in his speech to the National Convention regarding his justification for the Reign of Terror. His speech includes his justification for wanting France to be a republic and why the Reign of Terror must take place. The speech follows a format that goes from inspiring to contradictory very quickly. In the beginning of his speech, he outlines the aims, objectives and goals that the revolution set out to achieve as: liberty, equality, and brotherhood, however these were not achieved during the Reign of Terror.During the middle of the speech, Robespierre contradicts his previous goals/aims/objectives of liberty, equality, and justice by saying that the Reign of Terror was necessary to root out anyone who opposed the republic or die with them, because being a republic was what Robespierre believed was best for the nation of France. Robespierre believed that France needed the “virtues and miracles” that a republic conveyed, and they needed to do away with the “vices and snobbishness” that a monarchy displayed, as well as he wanted to be a model for the other nations of the world. His actions during the Reign of Terror , according to him, were justified by the virtue that is a republic.And, by executing individuals who did not support the republic, he was essentially helping France work towards a republic (his true vision of the best form of government for France). The link to nationalism is, ethnic. The nationalism that was generated and developed in France during the French Revolution was civic. Over the centuries, the monarchies have achieved political unity of France. In the wake of the Enlightenment, people began to take pride in serving the country rather than the king believed in equality. French ideas were are at the forefront of Europe and the world at large, at some point, the French Revolution almost seemed inevitable as more and more French people began to believe in nationalism. This quote is embracing nationalism. The “Reign of Terror”, although barbaric and violent, changed the lives of the people of France forever. Robespierre, although “heartless”, as some would say, envisioned France as a country of Liberty, freedom, and equality. His determination led France to victory in the end, despite all the massive bloodshed and loss. Developing rights, liberty, democracy, equality, and a newfound respect for every individual, the “Reign of Terror” succeeded in doing just about everything it had planned to do. The “Reign of Terror” created Nationalism that other European countries lacked, and demolished ruling classes, having France truly for the people.

Source two shows a picture of two RCMP officers, a sikh officer with a turban, and a female officer in male uniform. RCMP used to have a very strict dress code; they could not have facial hair, and had to wear a stetson. There was also rules for female officers, they had to wear a skirt, and have their hair in a ponytail. This picture is took after the Sikh turban issue in the 1990. When Baltej Singh Dhillon was accepted into the RCMP, he faced a choice -- serving his country or wearing his turban. He chose to fight for his religious rights. In 1990, the federal government finally removes the ban preventing Sikhs in the RCMP from wearing turbans. As well, this was also extended to women. They can now wear male uniform. The link to nationalism, is ethnic. Canada's identity is based on civic nationalism, one based on the ideal that the nation is an association of people who identify themselves as belonging to the nation, who have equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures. A civic nation consists of all those who subscribe to its political creed, regardless ethnicity, color, race, gender or religion. This picture is an example of embracing nationalism.
The officers were simply standing up and trying to protect their beliefs and values, and to create a equal field for both female and male. This movement created a more united Canada, and strive for what is best for the country, as a whole.

Source three shows a political cartoon. There are two objects in this cartoon, a girl and a car in flames. Instead of looking straight, the girl is looking down at the burning car with a worried expression. The phrase “Poverty, unemployment and Discrimination” is written below the burning car, which is contradicting the phrase written in the middle of the political cartoon; “Liberty, Equality, and Brotherhood”. This cartoon shows how the ideas of the french revolution is falling apart, hence the worried eyes, and the burning car represents a very clear reaction to the ongoing poverty, unemployment and discrimination that these immigrants have to face. This political cartoon was clearly mocking the French revolution ideas and how the people in France was not living up to these ideas.Migration has been a hot button issue in France for the last few years, especially since the riots in the working class, immigrant suburbs of Paris and other French cities in late 2005. The rioters, most of them second - or third- generation children of Muslim immigrants from North Africa, protested against high rates of poverty, unemployment, and racism in the suburbs. The link to nationalism, is religious. Like mentioned before, most of the rioters were Muslims, This riot was an indication of the failures of youth from these Muslim immigrant families to integrate into French society, and those who were mistreated. These rioters all had a common aim, to be treated fairly. This Political cartoon is embracing nationalism. The rioters wanted to get rid of poverty, unemployment and discrimination of immigrants, they were standing up for themselves, they wanted to create a voice, wanted to change french people’s way of thinking, so everyone can be treated equally no matter what race, color or religion you are from. The rioters had a sense of nationalism that was base of this riot. They wanted to be treated just live everyone else in the country and make the country better and efficient together.

All three sources deals with protecting their rights and what they believe in. In Source one, Robespierre believed that the laws should obey the fundamental rights according to his quote. Robespierre’s main goal was to make France a republic, which in his vision was the best form of government for France. So he used different ways to protect his goal, and the Reign of Terror was just one of them. In Source two, the sikh officer was trying to protect his Religious rights, and for the female officer it was Equality rights. In Source three, the car in flames was representing the 2005 riot that took place in France, these rioters were also trying to protect their equality rights, they wanted to be treated fairly and equally like everyone else in France. Source one and Source two embrace each other. In Source one, Robespierre is saying that you cannot just pass unjust laws and consider it to be just. You have to take in consider of other factors that affect the issue. The Reign of Terror was one of his “tactics” to protect his idea and goal.Source two, the sikh officer, is standing up for his religious rights, and the female officer, is standing up for her equality rights, regardless the previous rule they decided to fight for what they believe is right. Source one and Source three embraces each other.One big common thing that you can find in both sources is that both parties were willing to use violence to make their voice to be heard. In source one, Robespierre's “Reign of Terror” leadership made a huge impact on the French society and neighboring countries. In Source three, the rioters went on to the street, and they burned cars, buildings, objects, to have their voice to be heard and recognized. Source two and Source three also embraces each other, both groups was standing up for what they believe in, the sikh officers, and the majority muslim rioters were both concerned about their religious rights. These three sources were merely focused on protecting their rights and beliefs and to make their country as fair as possible.