I doubt the last part is true. The work of Robbespiere, among others, ended the age of rule by nobility and monarchy to various variants towards liberal democracy, much more impactful there than the American influence in government models in its own backyard. Furthermore, the dechristianization effort led Europe to be the grounds for LGBTQ+ and women’s rights far earlier.
See, this something that keeps bothering me every time the French Revolution is brought up. I had to point it out to you just a few days ago when you made that post about Napoleon. The French Revolution is not one single regime or one single set of ideas/policies, let alone one single person. The idea that of chalking up all its accomplishments (which are indeed considerable and changed not just France but the entire world for the better) to Robespierre is ludicrous. Robespierre was barely a side character for the first few years of the revolution: he wasn't a leader of the Third Estate when it first defied the King, he didn't contribute to the insurrection that led to the fall of the Bastille, he had no hand in the abolition of feudal privileges or the declaration of human rights. His first major stances in 1791 and 1792 were typically on the losing side, often in a Cassandra-esque fashion (most notably his opposition to war with Austria). In the early days of the Republic, he becomes a prominent leader, but far from the only or even the most prominent one. It's only after July 1793 that he really becomes the driving force (so, in all, for almost exactly a year). Even then, we shouldn't think of him as a tyrant in the way that Stalin and Mao would become - even in its most tyrannical forms, the revolutionary government remained collegial to its core. For example, dechristianization, which you directly cite, was fiercely opposed by Robespierre, and it took him half a year to amass the power he needed to put an end to it (and, eventually, recreate his own bargain-bin version of Christianity, the cult of the Supreme Being).
There are certainly good things you can attribute to Robespierre. He took a country that was teetering on the verge of anarchy and provided the decisive leadership that it needed to beat back the challenges it faced from all sides. He wasn't alone in that of course, and Carnot's military leadership was if anything a more decisive factor. And yes, even in the middle of the Terror some important and much-needed policies came out (such as, appropriately enough the abolition of slavery). But again, legislating during the revolutionary era was a decentralized process in a way that's hard to envision today, so just because something happened during the Terror doesn't mean Robespierre gets all or even most of the credit for it.
Poll
