Professor Wang Liqun has been lecturing on history in Lecture Room for some time. Pass it on and on, and finally turn Qin Shihuang into a "hero". Throughout the ages, China people have always regarded Qin Shihuang as a tyrant. Repairing the Great Wall and burning books to bury Confucianism are examples of his tyranny. Suddenly someone turned this Millennium conclusion upside down and turned it into a "hero" and a "benevolent gentleman", which is really new. This alone shows how democratic China society is today and how free speech is. Let a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend.
Ok, let's talk freely and discuss with Professor Wang Liqun whether Qin Shihuang was a tyrant or a "hero".
Professor Wang Liqun called Qin Shihuang a "hero" mainly on the basis that Qin Shihuang "conformed to the general trend of historical development and unified the six countries". Here, first of all, we don't agree with the statement of "unification". When there is a war or a separatist regime within a country, the rulers quell the war, eliminate the separatist regime and restore the country to its original state, which is called "reunification". In the Spring and Autumn Period, Qin and the other six countries were equal and independent countries, which in today's words were "sovereign" countries. Qin Shihuang is only the king of Qin. What right does he have to "unify" other countries? Does he have "Oracle" or "providence"? Neither. Qin's conquest and occupation of the six countries can only be said to be annexation or annexation, which is the law of the jungle.
"Conforming to the general trend of historical development" should be something relevant, beneficial and supportive to the people. What was the purpose of Qin Shihuang's annexation of six countries? We can give two examples. First, Qin Shihuang's mother was from Zhao. After the occupation of Zhao, Qin Shihuang rushed to Handan and killed all the people who had been enemies with Qin mother in the past. "Capital Tongzhi Jian" records: "Wang Jian attacked Zhao, broke it, then took Handan and captured it." . The king went to Handan, so anyone who had a grudge against his mother's family was killed. Secondly, every time Qin Shihuang annexed a country, the first thing he did was to bring the beautiful women from that country to Qin, and imitate the imperial palace of that country and build another palace in Xianyang, where the beautiful women could live and enjoy themselves. "Zi Tongzhi Jian" has such a record: "Every time a vassal is broken, write down his palace and make it the palace of Osaka in Xianyang. The temple, the government road and the Zhou Ge all belong to their own, and the beauty of the princes and the sound of bells and drums will be filled. " This shows that Qin Shihuang annexed the six countries only to realize his ambition and satisfy his own selfish desires, and has nothing to do with the "general trend of historical development" or the people. If so, it will only affect more people and make them suffer more. Historical facts have proved this.
We can also explain this problem from another angle. In the Song Dynasty, Jin Wushu invaded the Central Plains, and Yue Fei resisted Jin. After the northern part annexed Liao, Jin continued to invade the south in an attempt to annex Song. Due to Yue Fei's resolute opposition, Xu Jin failed. How should we evaluate this fact? Which behavior is just, the invasion of nomads from the Golden Army or Yue Fei's resistance to the Golden Army? Of course, we must support the latter. Of course, we can't say that the invasion of nomads from the Golden Army is "a unity that conforms to the general trend of historical development." This is by no means because the "unification" of the nomads from the army failed. Later, Kublai Khan, the ruler of the Yuan Dynasty, annexed the State of Jin and attacked the Southern Song Dynasty. Wen Tianxiang resisted being captured and died heroically. This time Kublai Khan succeeded in annexation. How should we evaluate this fact? Which behavior is just, Kublai Khan's annexation or Wen Tianxiang's resistance? Of course, we should still support the latter. Of course, we can't use the logic of "winner is king, loser is thief" to explain history. A just act is just even if it fails; Even if an unjust act succeeds, it is unjust.
Among the people, the story of Qu Yuan has been circulated. Qu Yuan is a rebel of annexation. People's eternal admiration and commemoration of this patriotic poet, in a sense, is not also a denial and condemnation of Qin Shihuang's annexation? Although Qu Yuan's patriotic behavior didn't work, Chu finally fell, but the people still praised him, just as they praised Yue Fei and Wen Tianxiang. This kind of praise represents an evaluation of right and wrong. Qin Shihuang's annexation of the six countries was indeed successful, but it was not a "heroic" move, but a "fierce" robber and overbearing behavior. The so-called "unification in line with the general trend of historical development" is just a concept invented by Professor Wang Liqun afterwards to whitewash Qin Shihuang's hegemonic behavior of robbers.
If the annexation of Qin Shihuang, Jin Wushu and Kublai Khan is regarded as "the unity that conforms to the historical development trend", then wouldn't Qu Yuan, Yue Fei and Wen Tianxiang become reactionaries against the historical development trend? Can you explain it this way?
Besides, repairing the Great Wall, burning books and burying Confucianism. Professor Wang Liqun believes that Qin Shihuang did these two things for "the stability of the empire". Maybe it is. However, this so-called "imperial stability" will not bring any happiness and benefits to the people. On the contrary, Qin Shihuang traded the lives of thousands of people in Qian Qian for his "imperial stability" by destroying and slaughtering people. Then, this "imperial stability" is not a good thing, but a curse. The story of Meng Jiangnu crying in the Great Wall has been circulated among the people. This story represents the voice of the people and shows the profound disaster brought to the people by the construction of the Great Wall. People have a negative attitude towards this matter. Not only the people, but also the feudal rulers after Qin Shihuang denied building the Great Wall. Sima Guang said in "As a Mirror": "The first emperor poisoned the world, and what Meng Tian did shows his ruthlessness." Meng Tian was the confidant of Qin Shihuang and the commander-in-chief of the Great Wall. "Cutting the mountains and pulling out the valleys, starting from Lintao, directly attacking the Liaohe River, with insufficient strength and more corpses, and insufficient loyalty." Sima Guang was once the prime minister of the Song Dynasty and a member of the feudal ruling class, but he advocated benevolent government and opposed tyranny. Sima Guang first affirmed that Qin Shihuang's construction of the Great Wall was an act of "poisoning the world" and a sin, but Meng Tian was willing to let it go, digging mountains and filling ditches, starting from Lintao in the west, extending to Liaoshui in the east and stretching to Wan Li. We're understaffed, but there are bodies everywhere. Although Meng Tian was loyal to his monarch, this did not offset his sins. It is evil because Qin Shihuang ignored human life, treated people as human beings and ignored life. People are like a group of animals, a group of livestock, who can command, enslave, trample, torture, kill and have no mercy at will. Countless people died of freezing, starvation, fatigue and illness because of the Great Wall. The story of Meng Jiangnv crying in the Great Wall truly reflects this tragic situation.
However, "grassroots scholars" actually said that the story of Meng Jiangnv crying at the Great Wall was "fabricated", and there was no such thing at all. This is nonsense! There may not be the name "Meng Jiangnv" in history, but the reality reflected in the story is completely true. The story of Meng Jiangnv crying at the Great Wall may be made up, but it is not "made up", but based on the reality at that time-"many people". The reason why people make up this sad story is to attack and accuse the people of the pain brought by the Great Wall. If building the Great Wall brings happiness to people, people will naturally make up another happy story to celebrate.
Qin Shihuang burned books at the suggestion of Prime Minister Lisi. Zi Tong Zhi Jian records as follows: "Anyone who keeps Poems, Books and hundreds of languages in the world will burn them. Those who dare to say "poetry" and "book" abandon the city (death penalty) and use the ancients (destroy the nine families). " At this time, two Confucian scholars criticized Qin Shihuang. They were very scared and ran away quickly. Qin Shihuang was very angry when he learned about it. He ordered the censor to severely interrogate all Confucian scholars in Xianyang, buried 460 of them alive, and released the rest of them to the frontier. This is the so-called "pit Confucianism". "Zi Tong Zhi Jian" records: "Hou Sheng and Lu Sheng laughed at the former emperor and died. When the late Emperor heard this, he was furious and said,' Lu Sheng and others have treated me very well, and now you are accusing me! People born in Xianyang, I will let people ask questions, or make a fuss about rumors. So someone suggested asking about the students. The students told on each other, but since more than 460 people broke the ban, they all went to Xianyang to make the world know, to punish them, and the rest moved to the border. "Criticizing Qin Shihuang will be intercepted, which is outrageous behavior and barbaric feudal fascism. This incident typically reflects the tyranny of Qin Shihuang. China's feudal society, which lasted for 2,000 years, practiced ideological autocracy, cultural autocracy and speech autocracy for the people, beginning with Qin Shihuang's burning books and burying Confucianism. This autocracy is a reaction and retrogression to the flourishing cultural phenomenon of "a hundred schools of thought contend" formed during the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period.
Professor Wang Liqun also quoted a sentence from Lu Xun to defend Qin Shihuang's atrocities. Lu Xun once talked about Qin Shihuang in "On the Similarities and Differences of Burning Books in Huade": "Mr. Hitler in Germany burned books, and the Chinese and Japanese theorists were better than Qin Shihuang. However, Qin Shihuang was really wronged. His loss was that he died the next year, and a group of idlers spoke ill of him for the new owner. " This sentence seems to mean that Qin Shihuang was not a tyrant and did nothing bad. It was only because of the death of II that he was accused of being Qin Shihuang. In fact, this understanding is wrong.
First of all, speaking of Lu Xun, it's really great. Many of his ideas and viewpoints are very incisive. However, no matter how great a man is, he is neither a fairy nor a god. He can't be superstitious, think that everything he says is absolutely correct, or copy everything he says with a dogmatic attitude. Professor Wang Liqun used Lu Xun's words to prove that Qin Shihuang was not a tyrant, but only from concept to concept, which was wrong. Whether a concept is correct can only be proved by the facts themselves. It cannot be said that what Lu Xun thinks is right must be right, and what Lu Xun thinks is wrong must be wrong.
Is it wrong to say that Qin Shihuang was a tyrant? Of course, it is not wrong at all. Although the Qin empire perished in the second year, this curse was planted by Qin Shihuang. People have long complained about his atrocities. For example, in 238 BC, Qin Shihuang found out that his mother was having an affair and gave birth to two children, so he moved her to another place to be imprisoned and killed the adulterer. Two illegitimate children also fell to their deaths in the cloth bag. Someone suggested that it was inappropriate, so Qin Shihuang killed it. Others remonstrated and killed 27 people in succession. At this time, a man named Mao Jiao advised Qin Shihuang on this matter, saying, "Your majesty is crazy and doesn't know evil? Che's false father, Bao's second brother, Isamu Tsuji, the martyr, Jie Li, Zhou Xing is not enough! It was completely disintegrated when I heard about it today. If there is no one who defected to Qin, I will be stolen by your majesty! " For example, in 2 12 BC, Qin Shihuang killed 460 Confucian scholars, and his eldest son, Fu Su, strongly opposed it, saying, "All students recite the teachings of Confucius, and now they all attach importance to the law. I am afraid that the world will be uneasy. " Both Mao Jiao and Fu Su foresaw the consequences of Qin Shihuang's atrocities, and also showed that the demise of Qin Dynasty was directly related to Qin Shihuang's tyranny.
But when Qin Shihuang was alive, the Qin empire under his rule was indeed "stable", and no one dared to say "no" to Qin Shihuang. This "stability" is maintained by cruel repression and slaughter. In 2 1 1 BC, a meteorite fell from the sky, and someone carved words on the stone, cursing Qin Shihuang and his early death. Qin Shihuang was furious and ordered all the residents of the village near the lettering stone to be arrested and killed. The stone was also burned. "Zi Tong Zhi Jian" records: "There are meteorites in Dong Jun. Or carve its stone and say,' When the first emperor dies, divide his land.' The first emperor asked for advice one by one, unconvinced. Take a stone and live next to it and burn it. "This incident not only reflects the cruelty of Qin Shihuang, but also shows the people's desire and dissatisfaction with Qin Shihuang's tyranny. The so-called "imperial stability" is only an illusion, and there is a huge crisis hidden under "stability". This kind of crisis will occur sooner or later. This is also the reason why the Qin Dynasty was so short-lived. In 220 BC, Qin Shihuang annexed six countries. 10 years later, in 2 10 BC, that is, the year after he brutally killed the residents near the lettering stone, Qin Shihuang died and Qin Ershi became king. The following year, in 209 BC, Chen Sheng and Guangwu revolted, and then Xiang Yu and Liu Bang overthrew the evil Qin Dynasty. The slogan put forward by the rebel army is: "If there is no way to cut it, Qin will perish."
Therefore, the demise of the Qin Dynasty had nothing to do with Qin Ershi. As soon as Qin Shihuang died and II ascended the throne, the uprising broke out. This evil result is entirely his own making, and he can't rely on others. How can he say "wrong"?
One more question. After the uprising broke out, the six countries originally annexed by Qin Shihuang also rose up in succession to resist the rule of the Qin Dynasty. In 207 BC, on the eve of the demise of the Qin Dynasty, Zhao Gao, the last prime minister of the State of Qin, declared the State of Qin the king of the past, and Qin Shihuang proclaimed himself emperor only after he annexed six countries. Now that the six countries stand on their own feet as kings and the territory of Qin State is smaller, it should be renamed Wang Wei. It is recorded in "A Mirror of Mutual Learning" that: "Qin was the first emperor to rule the world, so it was called the son of heaven. Today, the six countries stand on their own feet, and the territory of Qin is small, so we should take an empty name as emperor. That's as appropriate as ever. He made Zi Ying king of Qin. " The development of history here has returned to the starting point and the state before Qin Shihuang annexed the six countries. This is a very dramatic and ironic scene. The powerful Qin empire was just a flash in the pan. In a blink of an eye, the royal building collapsed, and the title of "emperor" could not be taken down, so it was renamed "king". Then I'd like to ask Professor Wang Liqun again: Which country is "in line with the general trend of historical development" when Qin Shihuang annexed six countries and later the six countries regained their independence and Qin became king? If it is the former, why did it later become king because "the six countries regained their independence and Qin benefited little"? What kind of "trend" is this? How should Professor Wang Liqun justify himself?
A few years ago, someone cast an iron statue of Qin Shihuang in Xi 'an and erected it in the street in an attempt to make him immortal, but it was immediately opposed and destroyed by the people. This shows that people's hearts are inviolable. The people were at odds with Qin Shihuang. Qin Shihuang is a symbol of autocracy, dictatorship and tyranny. To praise Qin Shihuang is to praise autocracy, dictatorship and tyranny, and to despise and insult the people. The people will not allow it. Qin Shihuang's case cannot be turned over. He is just a tyrant, not a hero. He can only live forever, but not die.