Final answer:
Robespierre would likely have opposed limiting citizenship to property owners or tax payers, as his revolutionary principles favored equality and broader political participation over exclusive systems of privilege.
Step-by-step explanation:
Maximilien Robespierre, during his reign, would arguably have been opposed to making property ownership or the payment of taxes the basis for defining citizenship and political participation rights. Robespierre was a leading figure of the French Revolution and was instrumental during the radical phase known as the Reign of Terror. While this subject is complex and Robespierre did not explicitly write about the specific question of tying property or tax payment to citizenship, his actions and principles during the Revolution suggest he would likely have supported broader participation rather than limiting citizenship to property owners or tax payers.
Robespierre's philosophy was influenced by Rousseau's idea of the general will and the belief that all individuals have a place in the political community. The Reign of Terror, driven by the Committee of Public Safety, was a drastic measure to protect the republic and maintain its virtues. They aimed to create a virtuous and equal society, which, in theory, would not align with the notion that only property owners or tax payers were virtuous enough to be citizens.
Moreover, the French Revolution, including the period under Robespierre's influence, significantly challenged the old systems of privilege, which included property-based citizenship. It strove instead for a society based on liberty, equality, and fraternity. As a lawyer and politician influenced by the Enlightenment, Robespierre would likely have seen property or tax-based citizenship as creating inequality, something he and other revolutionaries fought against.