China was an imperial country in ancient times, and the imperial system began in Xia Qi, after which all emperors were hereditary. Its legitimacy comes from the authorization of heaven and is called "destiny". Look at the imperial edicts of the ancient emperors, all of which say, "The emperor calls for heaven to carry things"! If you want to change the dynasty, you have to make a revolution, the full name is "getting rid of destiny." But this is a matter of heaven. If the son of heaven loses his virtue, the sky will be abolished. The problem is that Emperor Xian did not lose his virtue! He didn't engage in "widespread indignation and discontent" like Yin He did! Therefore, later generations think that Wei Chenghan is not an act of God. This can only be called "usurpation", not "orthodoxy". Because Emperor Gaozu had to be surnamed Liu and became orthodox, he had to "respect Liu and demote Cao".
Cao Cao's white face was first painted by his son Cao Pi. If Cao Pi had not "usurped the throne", there would have been nothing later.
Because xelloss didn't proclaim himself emperor, Liu Bei didn't dare. Liu Bei doesn't proclaim himself emperor, but Sun Quan doesn't dare. Cao Pi was easy to provoke from the beginning-"I can't touch what monks touch"? But dirty water splashed on Cao Jia's head; Charge, also have to surnamed cao's back. Who told you to "start"? Therefore, it is said in "Yi Zhongtian Pinsan Kingdom" that the day when Cao Pi's imperial robe was added to his body was the time when Cao Cao painted a bad face. Cao Cao's white face was first painted by Cao Pi. Of course, this is only the main reason why Cao Cao was scolded, not the only reason, nor the whole reason.
When Cao Cao was scolded, the Jin Dynasty began. Historians in the Eastern Jin Dynasty learned to gnash their teeth and first said that Cao Cao "usurped the inverse". He also advocated that Wei be erased from history and that "gold is easy" (The Book of Jin? Dental biography "). Until the Tang Dynasty, there were still different opinions. After the Song Dynasty, Cao Cao's white face image was completely stereotyped and deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. Su Shi, Zhu, Lu You, Luo Guanzhong and Emperor Qianlong were the worst revilers. These two are the best. Luo Guanzhong conquered the common people, and Emperor Qianlong frightened the scholars. You know, Gan Long is good at "literary inquisition". He said that Cao Cao was a villain. Who can say that? Unless you don't want your head.
The first person in history to reevaluate Cao Cao was Zhang Taiyan. Later, there were Hu Shi and Lu Xun. Later, Mr Lv Simian made it clear that he "defended Wei Wudi". Finally, there are Guo Moruo and Jian Bozan, and the founding leader Mao Zedong.
Since the Song Dynasty, people have generally disliked Cao Cao. The Song Dynasty was indeed a watershed in the evaluation of figures in the Three Kingdoms. A very important reason is that the relative power should be subordinate to the imperial power and concentrated on the emperor. During the Qin and Han Dynasties, the prime minister and the emperor could rival each other. At that time, there were three prime ministers, one in charge of administration, one in charge of military affairs and one in charge of supervision. The country has something to do, and the three "meetings" will first come up with a plan and hand it over to the emperor for approval. The emperor's five-day visit is actually just a "rubber stamp". So Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty was very dissatisfied and made a "general" to fight against the Prime Minister. But until the Tang dynasty, the power of the prime minister was still great. Without the countersignature of the Prime Minister, the imperial edict cannot take effect. In addition, when he appeared in the court, the prime minister sat down to discuss the problem, so he was called "sit down and talk." But after the Song Dynasty, the prime minister had to stand. The Ming emperor Zhu Yuanzhang simply abolished the prime minister, and there was no prime minister in the Ming and Qing Dynasties. In short, after the Song Dynasty, in order to strengthen the imperial power and suppress the relative power, we must "respect Liu and demote Cao". Because Cao Cao usurped the imperial power and became prime minister, but Zhuge Liang did not. This is the first reason.
The second reason why Song people didn't like Cao Cao was that Cao Cao looked down on literati and attacked gentry and literati. Many of the people he killed were scholars. Kong Rong, for example, and Bian Rang, for example, were all "convicted for their words". The Song Dynasty was precisely the dynasty with the highest status of scholar-officials. Song Taizu and Zhao Kuangyin once worked out "Three Chapters of the Constitution" with their descendants, one of which was "Don't Kill Literati". The intellectuals in the Song Dynasty had such a high status, how could they like Cao Cao, who had a hard time with literati? Even in order to maintain his lofty position, Cao Cao must be criticized as a "negative teacher". What's more, the rabbit died, hurting its own kind. You Cao Cao killed so many of our brothers, so we can't call you dog blood! Don't think that a scholar is unarmed and easy to bully. I'm telling you, pens are sometimes as useful as guns!
The third reason is that China people like to set an example. They should have their own idols and negative teachers. This kind of idolatry and negative teachers had better appear at the same time. Coincidentally, the Three Kingdoms just met people's psychological needs-Cao is a negative teacher, and Zhuge Liang is of course an idolater.
Because Zhuge Liang and Cao Cao are too comparable. First, they are all prime ministers, all prime ministers of the Han Dynasty, all "open the government" (that is, they have their own independent official positions) and have relative rights independent of imperial power. Second, they were also appointed Marquis, and they were also the highest-ranking county marquis. Cao Cao's title is "Hou of Wuping" and Zhuge Liang's title is "Hou of Wuxiang". Their names all sound similar. Third, they are both prime ministers and state shepherds. Cao Cao led Jizhou animal husbandry and Zhuge Liang led Yizhou animal husbandry. Does it look like it? Too much alike!
Cao Cao "usurped the inverse" and Zhuge Zhong was loyal. This is really a positive and negative teacher coming to the door. Therefore, in order to worship Zhuge Liang, Cao Cao must be belittled. or vice versa, Dallas to the auditorium In order to defeat Cao Cao, we must raise Zhuge Liang. This is the need of governing the country by virtue, and it is also the need of the ruling and opposition parties. Objectivity is not objective, and history is not history, so it will be ignored.