Answer:
For two centuries the varied interpretations that successive generations of historians have not ceased to contribute, constitute as many remodels of the event. The French Revolution has two opposite faces: on the one hand, the luminous face of 1789, a symbol of freedom, of equality and fraternity, of democracy and human rights, of triumph and of reason over obscurantism; on the other side, the face of terror applied in the name of the defense of revolutionary achievements in 1793.
The French Revolution had a strong influence on the German states, given the importance of the dissemination of Illustration in them. The German bourgeoisie was very aware of the development of events in France, as well as the privileged estates and the different Crowns for different reasons. Let us not forget, finally, the Napoleonic occupation over a large part of the German states. The main contemporary German philosophers of the Revolution were interested in it, but most of them were more concerned with philosophical, political and moral aspects than with the historical analysis of the causes, facts and consequences. They were, with nuances, defenders of the Revolution.
Enmanuel Kant (1724-1804) was a strong supporter of the Revolution because the establishment of the Republic meant achieving the most perfect and rational form of government, but rejected the violence and execution of Louis XVI.
Fichte (1762-1814) was also in favor of the establishment of the Republic but did defend the use of revolutionary violence because it was the only means to bring down the absolute monarchy. He even criticized the authors opposed to the Revolution because this was a stage on the road to freedom. But Fichte moved away with the time of the Revolution because he considered that he had not achieved his original liberal goals.
George W. F. Hegel (1770-1831) was also a fervent supporter of the Revolution because he was the one who had introduced Reason into politics and meant the victory of general interests over individuals. But he rejected the violent character he adopted in times of Terror.
Marx explains, with very concrete strokes for Germany, what he considers are the results and experiences of the French Revolution in bourgeois consciousness and practice. The unleashing of a process that aspires to develop a bourgeois revolution. That is to say, the essential claims that were claimed of the Ancien Regime staged social forces whose specific interests went beyond the original claims, and continually threatened the overflow of those borders, threatening, then, the stability and rules of the social order . That is, calling into question not the political order but that of society in general.
