"Qin Shihuang should not be responsible for the feudal dictatorship of China for 2000 years", which is a ridiculous proposition. However, there are many experts and scholars who have taken this as an article with great care. Therefore, it is necessary to say a few words.
For example, a quadrangle was built on your ancestors. Now, when you see neighbors have built Gemini of the world trade building, they go home and scold your ancestors why you don't build a world trade building for your grandchildren? What is hateful is why you courtyard is so strong, and the descendants have to push it down. As for the other people's house collapsed, killed people to try the wind and rain, then I don't care. Do you say that such children are unreasonable, lack of heart, ungrateful, or things?
Is it a great achievement for Qin Shihuang to unify China?
There is no doubt that it is work. It is to adapt to the development of the times and find the way to survive for the country and the people, which makes the Chinese civilization the only civilization in the world that has not been interrupted. Note that the interruption of civilization is not as simple as today when we meet each other. It is the national destruction, the people being killed and sold into slaves, and even the extinction of the race. Look at the Jewish experience of World War II, and think about the Nanjing Massacre in the Anti Japanese war. The ancients were more brutal and took it for granted than the present.
Did the emperor of Qin Shihuang establish a centralized emperor's state because he was particularly fond of dictatorship of Du?
Of course not. In that stage, all the great powers chose ducai's imperial system.
For example, ancient Rome. Before that, it was a republican system, nominated by the Senate, voted by the general assembly and elected two governors to act as the regime. But in 42 BC Caesar chose the overhead civil assembly and the Senate to implement a man Du CAI. Some members of the Senate who are keen on the republican system chose to assassinate Caesar. But after Caesar died, the state went to the imperial duchy.
Why did they abandon the republic system for hundreds of years and choose the imperial ducai? The times changed. Rome used to be a city state. The number of people attending the civil assembly is not large, and they live in the city and they can not only know each other, but also have slaves in each family. The owner of a family can concentrate on the meeting. The issues discussed are related to daily life, and they are interested in meeting. This is especially true of the Senate.
However, with the expansion of Roman power, the Italian peninsula was assigned to Rome, followed by France, Spain, North Africa were annexed, and the civil assembly was in vain. Who has been a long way to open a civil assembly for half a year? The Senate is also unable to make decisions on the issue fairly and timely because of its large number of people and different regional topics. This is the imperial Duchy of Caesar.
Did the feudal Du Cai rule in China begin with the unification of China by the first emperor of Qin Dynasty?
Of course not. The vassal states that the first emperor of Qin Dynasty destroyed were the ducai kingdoms that were more exclusive than the great Qin. Because they don't speak the rule of law as Qin Shihuang, they are more brutal and unreasonable than the emperor. Qin Shihuang did not kill a general minister in vain for 37 years. And those princes and other countries, king Qi Wei did not go up to the dynasty in nine years, and once the emperor did not ask about the Qing Hongbai, he killed the doctor a Cheng, and killed all the ministers who spoke for him. King Chu, who stabbed Wu Qi by the minister, shot an arrow at the body of the old king of Chu, and killed dozens of ministers. It is a great progress that Qin Shihuang eliminated the princes to unify China and established a country that was more enlightened and obeyed the law than these kingdoms.
It is wrong to say that Zhou Tianzi period was a republican system. Compared with ancient Rome, you have no people in the civil assembly and people have no decision-making power, even if you do not have the appearance, how can you call it a republic?
When many countries in the world have been rid of the imperial system and built the Gemini of the world trade building, why is China not?
This problem is relatively complex, and the main factor is geography. Republics are easy to implement in marine countries, while mainland countries are more difficult. Real problems, like in Europe, are you dissatisfied that the king can escape to the island. When we get there, we can catch fish for living. It's not easy for the king to catch you. You can also attack the king's merchant fleet to make the king face to face loss. In ancient times, it is not said that today, with such advanced technology, Somali pirates can do whatever they want, as we can imagine. Therefore, the king of the sea nation dare not be so horizontal, and he is willing to compromise with the noble. This is the basis of the republican system.
Mainland countries can't, especially after the population is increased, where do you escape? Even if the king doesn't catch you, it will take months to plant land and feed. Therefore, in such a country, the king was unreasonable and had no foundation for the republican system.
Marine countries are also prone to form a small state situation, because we can develop outwards and make money by marine fisheries and trade. It is unnecessary to swallow up and fight with each other, and it is not easy to swallow others across the ocean. The mainland is not a country. There will be a fight between the two countries, and war is needed. The winning side will swallow the failed side. Finally, there is no end to the ability and the ability to swallow. The country is big, at least the central area can be peaceful.
Knowing this, we know that the emperor of Qin Shihuang unified China and implemented the imperial system. It is not that Qinshihuang is particularly good at Du Cai than others, which is the need of the times.
Can the Qin state of the first emperor of Qin be equal to Liu Bang and the 2000 year regime?
Of course not. The state of the first emperor of Qin is more like a constitutional monarchy. Under the emperor, 70 doctors were set up, such as parliament, prime minister, imperial history and Tingwei, and the separation of powers of government, supervision and justice. The first emperor of Qin did not establish a prince, and did not make his descendants king. There are historical records clearly recorded that the Emperor Qin Shihuang once proposed the position of Zen, but it was not possible to implement it because of illness.
Qin Shihuang did propose that "I was the first emperor, and later generations counted, and the second and third generations as to the world, the transmission of infinite." But please note that there is no word "descendants" here. The first emperor of Qin never said that he would pass Jiangshan to his "descendants", and that there would be endless generations of "descendants". Later scholars have the suspicion that they have no academic integrity or even academic misconduct.
Liu Bang and his descendants did not speak much about the rule of law, passed on to sons, and made them king, and became more unreasonable.
One netizen said well. You can't believe that Laozi Zhuang Zi also pretends to be haunted and scolded for their damned because there are Taoist priests who pretend to be gods and ghosts today.
Did the hundred families contend to exterminate in the unification of China by the first emperor of Qin?
Of course not. It was a matter of fact that scholars were not convinced of the facts.
The argument of hundred families refers to the present situation of a group of scholar and officials in the Xia school palace of Qi Guoji, which has been solicited to write books and make statements by the gate guests. Jixia school palace was destroyed by the king of Qi Min in 284 BC, when the first emperor of Qin was not born. The reason for its destruction is not the unity of the state, but the incessant wars among the various princes. The destroyer is Yueyi, the general of Yan state. Yueyi led the princes to attack Linzi, the capital of Qi, and then occupied the whole territory of Qi. King Qi Min fled and was killed by Nao teeth, the Chu general. The grass learned people or were killed, or scattered by birds and animals. From then on, the princes again disdain empty talk, and began to pay attention to strength.
The reason is that the kings of Qi were cheated by lobbyists and indulged in empty talk. This made the whole country not pay attention to industrial strength, and the Eastern Emperor Qi was destroyed. In order to raise their position, scholars of previous dynasties deliberately turned over the right and wrong, praised the role of university people, and blinded the later generations for thousands of years.
Even though ancient Greece had such a period of debate, its end was not to destroy the establishment of dictatorship and the unification of Empire, but to the war. Socrates was voted dead by the Democratic Athenian citizens. His disciples and many famous scholars, assibyades, turned into enemy. As soon as kritias became a dictatorship, he bloody suppressed the people. Agasson fled Athens and ran to Macedonia, the enemy country. Sanofin ran to Persia, his old enemy, to attack his country with troops. Athens, which indulged in philosophical rhetoric, was defeated by Sparta, and the whole Greece was destroyed by Macedonia. Today's Greece has nothing to do with ancient Greece. From the first century BC to the 19th century 2000, there was no Greek country at all. It was not until the mid-19th century that the Ottoman Empire was destroyed that there was a country like Greece. But this Greece has little to do with ancient Greece, whether ethnic or cultural.
In fact, the hundred schools of thought are not as beautiful as they appear in the face of the word. The theory of hundred schools of the pre Qin Dynasty is the rule theory without exception. Which family is "Wang Houjiang is better to have a seed"? No. What will happen? No doubt, he was beheaded and killed.
The argument is not so important that magic. There is no debate in the history of the United States. Others rely on technology development industry to make money and become the world's largest. There is no argument in Britain, and it is the British Empire by the industrial revolution and maritime trade. Japan, which has no hundred schools of thought, has learned to run small industrial inventions with a sincere heart. It once dominated the world and is still a big economic country.
The right conclusion: what China needs now is not empty talk, not complaining about its ancestors, but practical industry. Today, there are some unhappy places, not blame the ancients, but people today strive to find ways to develop and advance.
