I haven't answered your question because it assumes that there is some sort of psychological need to attack people who are not the origin of the problem. I refute your assumption that by taxing the super rich out of existence (they'll still be around, they just won't have nearly as much power) there is a reason to attack someone else. That's your idea, not mine. 
The Terror was part of the French revolution, some would argue a necessary part given that the situation was one of both civil war and war against the aristocracies of the other countries at war with France. 
Not exactly sure what "your side of the argument will bankrupt the nation" means. It's a poorly written sentence in that it's vague and provides no evidence or examples of what you mean. 
In the early post-war decades income gains were widely shared, not so since then. There's no reason it can't go back to being more fairly shared. It's a matter of political will and majority rule. We're the majority, they're a minority.