Since Robespierre was considered of high morality and virtue, your answer is virtue and goodness.
Hope this helps!
Answer:
<h2>direct democracy</h2><h2>Issues and controversies</h2><h2>Discussions on direct-democratic institutions deal with several issues. The strongest normative grounds for direct democracy are the democratic principles of popular sovereignty, political equality, and all the arguments for participative democracy that support the idea that all citizens should have the right not only to elect representatives but also to vote on policy issues in referenda. Since assembly democracy cannot be an option in modern societies (outside Switzerland), direct-democratic institutions are regarded not as a full-scale alternative to representative democracy but as a supplement to or counterweight within democratic systems with major representative features. Nevertheless, the institutional difference and competition between representative and direct-democratic processes lie at the core of the controversy whether direct democracy contributes to undermining representative democracy or can offer enrichments of democracy.</h2>
<h3>Explanation:</h3>
<h3>correct me if I'm wrong</h3><h3>please brainless my answer</h3>
The Federalist Papers mainly argued for ratification of the Constitution and promised that the federal government under the Constitution would not become too powerful and tyrannical--which was the concern of the Anti-Federalists.
The right of a criminal defendant to have a lawyer assist in their defense, even if they cannot afford to pay for one. This right to does not apply in all cases, and comes from a variety of sources. The Sixth Amendment gives defendants the right to counsel in federal prosecutions, but the right was not applied to state prosecutions for felony offences until 1963 in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; see also Incorporation (of the Bill of Rights). Thus, the right to counsel does not apply in state non-felony cases.
One area of controversy related to the right to counsel is the question of when the right attaches, or, in other words, when, in the process of criminal prosecution, the defendant gains the right. The Supreme Court has ruled that a defendant gains the right to an attorney “at or after the time that judicial proceedings have been initiated against him, whether by formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment” Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 at 398 (1976).
In addition, the Supreme Court has ruled that the right to a lawyer implies the right to an effective lawyer.
