From the perspective of modern politics, we can see that Guan Zhong's talent is not only expressed in military and politics, but also in economy, philosophy, law, diplomacy, education, talent, management, ethics and other aspects, including practical experience in governing the country and the world, as well as relevant theoretical summary. According to common sense, such a person who exploits political situation, influences historical development, and causes great changes in society should have a lofty ideological and historical status. However, in Chinese history, Guan Zhong's status seems to be far lower than those "empty talkers" of his contemporaries, such as Confucius, Mencius, Laozhuang and so on. Even Sima Qian only included Guan Zhong in Guan Yan's biography in historical records, with a total length of only a few hundred words. In the long history of China, only Liang Qichao in the late Qing Dynasty said that Guan Zhong was "the biggest politician in China". Now it seems that Liang Qichao's statement is not too much.
It is worth mentioning that Confucius' evaluation of Guan Zhong -- in the Analects of Confucius, Confucius' evaluation of Guan Zhong has two aspects. One is that someone asked Confucius, "is Guan Zhong simple?" Confucius's question and answer is: "Guanzi has three goals. How can he be thrifty if he doesn't take care of official affairs?" It means that Guan Zhong takes some market rents as his own. It's not frugal, that is, it's not honest. On the other hand, Zi Gong and Zi Lu asked Confucius what he thought of Guan Zhong's betrayal of his son and his assistance to Duke Huan of Qi? Confucius's answer is: "micro tube Zhong, I was left Ren Yi." The meaning is: Guan Zhong assisted Duke Huan of Qi to be the overlord of the princes. Without Guan Zhong, we would all spread our hair, open our skirts and become the common people under the rule of barbarians. It can be seen that Confucius generally affirmed Guan Zhong, but at the same time, he thought that there was still a great lack of Guan Zhong's moral integrity. A person with a stain is not worth advocating.
Why is Guan Zhong in such a situation? I think it's because of Chinese traditional culture. In my opinion, the biggest weakness of Chinese culture lies in understanding. For the understanding of things, in many cases, there are always deviations due to the lack of depth and understanding ability. Chinese civilization has always been regarded as agricultural civilization. To some extent, it has always been narrow and pedantic. For example, they believe too much in personal consciousness, pay no attention to humanity, lack rational consciousness, lack scientific spirit, weak identification mechanism, innovative consciousness and legal spirit, etc. The biggest manifestation of this is that the "way of a gentleman" advocated by Confucius and Mencius is more like a castle in the air. Due to the lack of in-depth understanding of human nature, it seems illusory. From the perspective of modern philosophy, Confucius and Mencius' way of being a gentleman is based on the premise of "good nature". However, in reality, human nature is nothing but "good" and "evil". It is just complex and changeable. There is a problem in the starting point of Confucianism, which determines that there is a problem in the whole philosophy system of "the way of gentleman", and also determines that the way of "the way of gentleman" moral education and governance can not be realized.
At the same time, the Chinese people's habit and tradition of stressing words but not deeds, and stressing names but not facts make Chinese culture lack sufficient research and respect for practitioners and operators for a long time. Guan Zhong is not only a manager, but also a system creator. History is written by posterity. For a manager, many thoughts and understandings are mostly embodied in specific measures. With the passage of time, what is really presented in front of posterity has become rather vague. Therefore, when people are sorting out a certain period of history, they often follow the old written materials to find, which is difficult to compare and identify through the secular people at that time. In this way, it is difficult for the history arrangers to understand the wisdom and good intentions of some managers. In addition, history arrangers are often literati without practical experience. It is difficult for them to make a realistic judgment of the former managers. Even, they are subconsciously envious of their high position. Therefore, there is always a gap in the evaluation of history - the contrast, perhaps, is the dark element of human nature. History is complex. When analyzing history, we must face up to these seemingly trivial problems.
Because of such thinking habits and traditions, Chinese culture is more respectful of the way that is actually pedantic but more solemn and stirring; or, it is more respectful of Lao Zhuang, who is free and easy and full of game spirit. Compared with Guan Zhong's rationality and reality, the way of Confucius and Mencius is to "know what can't be done", which is more in line with the moral requirements of Chinese culture for individuals; Lao and Zhuang are more pure and more like a perfect ideal of life. Besides, Confucius, Mencius and Laozhuang have been cultivating their morality all their lives. Although they are different in many ways, they are all morally perfect. Unlike Guan Zhong, they always seem to have moral flaws. The narrators of history are always influenced by more emotional factors. Just because of this, people feel that Confucius, Laozi, Mencius and Chuang Tzu are far superior to Guan Zhong in cultural and ideological status.
