What s wrong with Cao Cao? As long as it s bad, answer in detail

1.In that era, good people couldn't survive, let alone achieve great causes, and if you wanted to achieve something, you couldn't be too kind. 2.

At that time, Cao Cao was about as bad as others, but due to people's prejudice and literary and artistic rendering in the future, his image became worse and worse.

Because the author of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms wants to highlight Liu Bei's goodness, and Cao Cao's bad can be better compared, so his image is arranged in this way.

Because Cao Cao is a villain in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, he has been smearing him.

I don't think Cao Cao is bad, it's just that he was in a different position from everyone else at the time, and he would do it for the sake of profit. In addition, the TV series changed his role to be very treacherous, so people will feel that he is bad.

Cao Cao in the historical records is a very good military strategy, very cherishes talents, loves the people, but in the Three Kingdoms, the characters have the author's individualism, so he seems bad.

He's not bad, it's just that his personal battlefield ability and resourcefulness are relatively good. At the beginning of the chaos of the Eastern Han Dynasty, he was the only one who wanted to end the difficult life of the people, and the subsequent years of war were also to prepare for reunification.

Because Cao Cao had his own imperial dream, this is why he had to use Emperor Han Xian to arm himself and make himself strong.

Before the Song Dynasty, Cao Cao was still a hero who was praised, but in the Northern Song Dynasty, in order to promote the idea of loyalty and patriotism, Cao Cao was belittled as a hero in troubled times, and Liu Bei, who had the royal blood of the Han Dynasty, became a great hero in the Three Kingdoms. Cao Cao may have done a lot of inauthentic things, but Liu Bei has also done a lot of inauthentic things.

Xiaoxiong: It's not good, it's all for personal gain.

Just because of his ambition and suspicion of others.

The quality of a historical figure is often judged by his contribution to society.

Cao Cao coerced the Son of Heaven to order the princes, but think about it upside down, when the emperor was in the most critical moment, when he didn't even have anything to eat, only Cao Cao greeted the emperor. The so-called "coercion", I personally feel that I can't eat grapes and say that grapes are sour.

Cao Cao is treacherous, but he is treacherous and treacherous, and rarely conspires and tricks, this is called a real villain, not to mention, the word thick black, Liu Bei is more obvious.

To the society: Cao Cao stabilized the Han dynasty and did not usurp the throne until his death.

For the economy: Cao Cao's tuntian system was unique at that time.

Culture: Cao Cao himself loves poetry and songs, and he also admires culture very much (killing Kong Rong and killing Yang Xiu cannot be regarded as not supporting culture).

To the nation: The northern expedition to Karasuma expanded the territory.

There is no answer to this question, just as there is no answer if you ask anyone if they are good or bad. Both good and bad are relative, and there will be changes depending on the position and the times. And there are two sides to any one person.

There is no distinction between good and bad, but who can determine the world, it is the people who suffer, the soldiers who die in battle, and the people who pursue the way of survival.

The traitor of Qingping, the hero of troubled times.