Perhaps no one is more controversial about Qin Shihuang in history: the titles of emperors in previous dynasties seem grand but derogatory, while the names of tyrants in previous dynasties are firmly rooted in history and irrefutable evidence! Therefore, the people of all ages pointed fingers at each other and criticized each other. But there are also a few people who stand at the height of history and overlook the past and the present. For more than 2,000 years, mankind has moved from ignorance to civilization, the outline of history has been roughly shaped, and the concept of success or failure has been throughout. The historical perspective is like deep astigmatism. Think about why Qin Shihuang was scolded, which is nothing more than cruelty, extortion, burning books and burying Confucianism, and so on. However, a person who knows history doesn't know how many emperors in China 100 were benevolent? It can be said that benevolence and righteousness are often exceptions, and cruelty is a common phenomenon. Not to mention summer? Both Shang, Zhou and Lu Xun once said that the emperors of the Ming Dynasty were "hooligans", but in the long 2000 years, there were only a handful of peaceful and prosperous times such as "the rule of Wenjing", "the rule of Zhenguan", "the prosperity of Kaiyuan" and "the prosperity of Kanggan". As for building tombs and palaces, which king didn't? Which generation didn't rely on exploiting the people and exacting countless taxes? Tyranny is fiercer than a tiger. Didn't Liu Zongyuan of Datang sigh deeply? Crows in the world are generally black, only a hundred steps away. Since these charges are suitable for most emperors and princes, these things will happen in every dynasty. Why is Qin Shihuang the only one reviled by the world and blamed by thousands of people? Some scholars have pointed out that emperors and kings of short-lived dynasties are generally not good, because it is their enemies who write history, and it is always the winner who is the king and the loser who is the enemy. Those who replace them need to prove that they are the will of fate, and naturally they should beautify themselves and vilify their opponents. In the history of our country, except Xiang Yu, no hero failed-some scholars pointed out that this was because Sima Qian was imprisoned and resented Liu, so the enemy of the enemy became a friend. For this reason, I wrote Xiang Yu to cover the world with anger, even if I was defeated. Look at Emperor Yangdi, a famous prostitute in history. "Adultery mother incest" has almost reached the point where the audience washes their eyes and the listener washes their ears. In fact, aren't Tang Gaozong and Wu Mei, Tang Xuanzong and Yang Yuhuan, a concubine who took her father and a wife who took her children, all the same incest? But why is the latter far less prominent than the former? Bai Juyi's "Song of Eternal Sorrow" has become a touching sad love story, which makes everyone seem to forget that behind this story is the ugliness of the wife who took away his son. There is a gap between incest in the Sui and Tang Dynasties, but more importantly, the Sui Dynasty was only a few decades, and the history of the Sui Dynasty was written by the Tang Dynasty. By the Tang Dynasty, three hundred years had passed, and the official had already made a decision, which gradually became well known. It is better to believe in books than to have no books, even history books. I believe that Qin Shihuang's cruelty is a fact, but there are also exaggerated elements of Liu Han. Epang Palace, is it really "300 Li"? Even if the ancient palace is only one-tenth of what it is now, it is three miles. Today, Sanli is a medium-sized city. However, Epang Palace is just a palace, not a city. I can't imagine what a 30-mile palace looks like. It's still ancient. Really burned for three months? I don't know how the fire started. It didn't rain for three months. It burns intermittently for three months, but in fact it may only take ten and a half months. Of course, literary exaggeration is allowed, and it is unwise to take it too seriously. What later generations refer to the most and the least popular is "burning books to bury Confucianism". After Hanwu, only Confucianism respected Confucianism. Confucianism has occupied an orthodox position in China for almost two thousand years, and all previous dynasties were Confucian scholars. Qin Shihuang's move can make life difficult for later Confucian scholars and naturally become the target of public criticism. But in fact, the motive of "burning books to bury Confucianism" is because Qin Shihuang was fooled by Xu Fu's trick of seeking immortality, and he was so angry that he found several scapegoats, most of whom were not "Confucianism" but other Huang Lao miscellaneous scholars. More than 400 people were buried, but how many books were burned is unknown. In short, the damage and destruction to culture is far less thorough than the rejection of Confucianism. It has neither interrupted the development of culture nor changed the direction of development. The impact on society, regardless of the breadth and depth of suffering involved, is far worse than the "party ban rebellion", "literary imprisonment" and even the Cultural Revolution in later generations. "Burning books to bury Confucianism" does not mean how many people were buried and how many books were burned, but that Qin Shihuang offended all Confucian scholars and had a bad influence. To say the least, even if Qin Shihuang was really cruel, please ask yourself, if it were you, are you sure you would be much better? Without firm belief and extraordinary perseverance, how many people can resist the "sugar-coated cannonball" and "erosion of power"? There are roughly two kinds of people who can accuse Qin Shihuang of cruelty without changing his face. One kind of people use harsh words to exclude their own people and prove their sense of justice and morality. For example, emperors and officials of past dynasties set up a tyrant for generations to show that they were not too bad. The other is the victim under the weight of the wheel of power. Their high purity is often just because they stand on the opposite side of power and have no chance to taste it. As the oppressed, they have instinctive and unforgettable hatred for the oppressor, so it is easy to follow suit. For various reasons, Qin Shihuang became a tyrant and left him with eternal infamy. It's not that Qin Shihuang can't scold, but that he doesn't have to scold to the point of perdition. If we think deeply, the people who can really scold Qin Shihuang should be Qin people, and it seems unfair for our descendants to scold again, because Qin people are victims, but we are beneficiaries. I didn't say wrong, you heard wrong! Comment on a person, not just look at one side, but comprehensive analysis, Marx said this is dialectics. Li Shimin killed his brother and took the throne. Although I have to, this is not a glorious thing, but he is still a generation of wise kings. Why? Don't hide On the other hand, such a generation of wise men have also done things that go against common sense and Confucianism. It can be seen that no one is perfect. The most important thing is to know people and discuss things. We should focus on everything, instead of seeing the forest for the trees. Of course, Qin Shihuang was cruel and had outrageous deeds, but this cruelty was not unique to him or unprecedented. No matter how much you hate Qin Shihuang, we have to admit that this tyrant is really brilliant and has done many magnificent things, such as destroying six countries and unifying the whole country. Throughout history, what the emperor left to future generations and history is an achievement in terms of significance and value. Today, the Great Wall has almost become the name of China and a symbol of prosperity, and many people in China are proud of it. There are terracotta warriors and horses, known as the "eighth wonder", which shocked the world. The Great Wall and the Terracotta Warriors and Horses make the people of China feel proud, spreading the old dreams of many big countries and ancient countries and expanding the new spirit of complacency and complacency; If the Great Wall and Terracotta Warriors and Horses exist as "criminal evidence", how can our amazement and admiration be self-deception? Will Germany use the "achievements" of concentration camps to show and brag about its great strength and martial arts to the world? If these cultural relics are affirmed as treasures of people's cultural history, then we admire and appreciate them here, but criticize their founders there. Are we hypocritical or what? This logic is a bit strange. At least scold, but be sure. Or you can say that Qin Shihuang did not build the Great Wall and Terracotta Warriors, but the King of Qin. If so, how many recognized heroes are real heroes in the world? Without the Red Army behind Mosuo, can two separate commanders make a revolution? Before Liu Deng, could two people cross the river without 100,000 troops? If Sun Yat-sen had only one mouth, could he use this "cannon" to blow up Manchu? Of course not, but why do we say that Zhu Mao, Liu Deng and others are the founding fathers, and they have made great contributions? Why do we still recognize Dr. Sun Yat-sen as the father of our country? This is a question involving the role of individuals and the role of the masses. It can be said that both are equally important. There is no role for the masses, but only for individuals, which is undoubtedly an armchair strategist. Only the role of the masses, without the ideological guidance of outstanding individuals, often becomes nonsense and can't go far. In both cases, the role of individuals is often greater than that of the masses. Therefore, Zhu Mao, as an ordinary soldier, can't kill the enemy, but he can lead the army, smash the enemy's five encirclement, and lead the people to victory step by step. There are no assumptions in history. We don't know if there would be Zhang Li without Zhu Mao, but there must always be so few leaders. Since history has chosen them, this is an unchangeable fact, and we can only affirm their role. So, although Qin Shihuang didn't build the Great Wall and carve clay figurines brick by brick, can you deny the role played by Qin Shihuang? Without Qin Shihuang, all this is possible. With Qin Shihuang, all this became a reality. We can not only applaud the Terracotta Warriors and Horses Great Wall, but also regard it as evidence of Qin Shihuang's cruelty. Then we should divide our understanding of Qin Shihuang into two parts as criminal evidence. We can plead for the Qin people and criticize the cruelty of Qin Shihuang. As a cultural ban, should we, as a modern person, give its founder a fair evaluation on the basis of possessing, sharing and utilizing these great miracles? We should have a rational analysis of Qin Shihuang. Merit is merit, and excesses are excesses, which cannot be offset or erased. If only one or two decent relics are left for future generations, the role of Qin Shihuang will be too small. Looking at Qin Shihuang's influence and contribution to China, these relics are superficial, the slightest and even negative-as a cruel witness, Qin Shihuang's real merit is the founder of China. If we are proud of our long history and vast territory, have we ever thought about laying the basic pattern of China, so that this huge land, though temporarily divided, is still intact, unlike Europe, which is divided into small countries? This credit undoubtedly belongs to Qin Shihuang. Even without the Terracotta Warriors and Horses of the Great Wall, as a modern person, we should pay a little respect while criticizing Qin Shihuang. Before the Qin Dynasty, there were Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties. Why did Qin Shihuang unify China instead of Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties? Is it just that the territory of Qin State is much larger than that of Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, and Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties are neglected because they are small? Of course not, because although Xia, Shang and Zhou were unified countries, they were not unified countries in the strict sense, because they were all based on the enfeoffment system. There are small countries among big countries and small countries among small countries. The central government cannot directly manage those enfeoffment countries, which have their own systems and great autonomy. It can be seen that the unification of Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties is only superficial, territorial, real, political and cultural. Before the Qin Dynasty, the political disunity was obvious. The central government could not directly manage the local government (sealing the country), and the culture was even more disunity, which was far worse than it is now. The Seven Heroes in the Warring States Period have their own characters, their own measurements, different sounds, different texts and different quantities. Qin people, Zhao people, Lu people and Yan people all know that Qin Shihuang destroyed six countries and unified China. Its significance lies not only in destroying their opponents politically, but also in changing the feudal system. Today, although we have more than 50 ethnic groups, although the dialects of each ethnic group are different, Chinese characters are almost the same language for all ethnic groups. This point is very heavy, as small as a nation and as big as a country. Besides regionality and consanguinity, it is the deepest integration of culture. The same culture is the greatest cohesion and centripetal force. It is precisely because of cultural integration that many countries that were originally divided finally achieved reunification, such as East and West Germany, and because of cultural differences, some countries finally became independent, such as the former Soviet Union. Europe has been divided into so many small countries, but it has never been unified. The most important thing is that there are different languages, such as French, English and Spanish. Almost several countries have several languages. Although face to face, but the language is different, can it be truly integrated? It can be said that culture is not unified and it is difficult to truly unify. I remember in the novel "The Last Lesson", Dodd said that the Prussians wanted to occupy the region and switch to Germany, which aroused great national pride and brought great humiliation. It is really a disproof of cultural differences and personality differences, and the difference can be more than 108,000 miles. Politically, the Han dynasty almost copied the Qin system in order to get rid of its brutality and protect the people's peace. If there is no unified writing of the king of Qin, the country will be changed to counties, or the system of enfeoffment, and the books will still be in different languages and to different degrees. Then, it is very likely that China in the future will eventually split into several countries or a dozen countries like Europe, and we will be proud of it. The basic pattern of China was laid by Qin Shihuang, and the real opinion of China was the prelude of Qin Shihuang. The real unification of China began with Qin Shihuang. It is really because of the real reunification of Qin Shihuang that the concept of great unity has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people from generation to generation. No matter how small the split is, no matter how big the North-South confrontation is, it is still dominated by great reunification. If the Qin dynasty could last longer, it would be very willing to call our nation Qin, not Han, but Qin people. Without Qin Shihuang, can we imagine it would be decent? There are no assumptions in history. We only know that because of the cultural unity of Qin Shihuang, a huge nation and a vast country have an unbreakable cornerstone. There is such a passage in The Analects of Confucius: "Zi Gong said,' Is Guan Zhong heartless? Duke Huan killed Miyako for a long time, but he couldn't die, and he was with him. Confucius said, "Guan Zhong was a duke, a tyrant and a conqueror of the world, and the people have been blessed by him so far. Wei Guanzhong, I was left behind. If a man and a woman forgive him, they will cross the ditch unconsciously. " Because Guan Zhong could not die, but he defected to the enemy, which did not meet the Confucian standards, but Confucius affirmed Guan Zhong's merits. If Confucius was active in the Qin dynasty, would he also say, "I am slightly better than the government, and I am left behind?" If a man and a woman forgive him, they will cross the ditch unconsciously. "In fact, Confucius is not an old-fashioned person, but a broad-minded person. His evaluation of Guan Zhong is based on the historical height. Although Qin Shihuang was cruel, he made great contributions and had a far-reaching impact on later generations. Is it correct for those who obliterate Qin Shihuang's contributions and merits to infinitely enlarge his faults? I am deeply saddened that many dissidents have made great contributions to China, even if they are not commendable, there is no need to be so abusive. Qin Shihuang can be said to be the first person who was seriously wronged and said that he was cruel. Qin Shihuang is not unprecedented, nor will he be immortal, but his exploits are rarely comparable to his. Great things must be done with an iron fist. Why do people only say that he is cruel, but no one is sure of his contribution? What is Shi Wen's sin? Unique name is too high! History is official, but history books are written by the people. Attached, Mao Zedong's evaluation of Qin Shihuang Qin Shihuang (1), the first person who unified China, is an expert who knows the past and the present. (2) On one occasion, he said to Zhang: You said that the * * * production party was equal to Qin Shihuang. No, it was more than a hundred times. (3) Confucius and Mencius are idealists, Xunzi is materialist and Confucian leftist. Confucius represents slave owners and nobles. Xunzi represents the landlord class. He added: In the history of China, the real doer was Qin Shihuang, and Confucius only talked empty words. For thousands of years, Confucius became a mere formality, but actually acted according to Qin Shihuang. Qin Shihuang used students from Lisi, Legalist and Xunzi. (4) Confucius has some advantages, but not very good. We should be fair. Qin Shihuang was much greater than Confucius. Confucius is empty talk. Qin Shihuang was the first person to unify China. It not only unified China politically, but also unified China's writing and various systems in China, such as weights and measures, some of which are still in use today. No second feudal monarch in China has surpassed him, but he has been scolded for thousands of years. (5) I advise you to scold Qin Shihuang less and discuss the reasons for burning the pit. The ancestral dragon's soul is still dead in Qin, and Confucius' scientific name is high. EMI is good at Qin politics and law, but ten batches are not good articles. Be familiar with the feudal theory of the Tang Dynasty, and don't return to King Wen from zihou. Politicians of all ages have made great achievements, and legalists were all in the early feudal society. These people advocate the rule of law and beheading if they break the law. They advocate respecting the present and cherishing the past. Confucianism is full of benevolence and morality, full of thieves and prostitutes, and all advocate respecting the past and cherishing the present. (6) Qin Shihuang was the first famous emperor in China feudal society, and I was also Qin Shihuang. Lin Biao called me Qin Shihuang, and China has always been divided into two factions, one saying that Qin Shihuang is good and the other saying that Qin Shihuang is bad. I agree with Qin Shihuang, but I disagree with Confucius.