Who is the greatest ruler in the Chinese history?

[Guest Cipher]

Can't agree. Why you pick 成吉思汗? Because he established a vast empire by 40ys conquest and aggression. Judge a ruler from a view of what he brought to his people. Genghis Khan was a great commander but not a great ruler.

What are you talking about? Ghengis khan is not only a great commander but also a great ruler. He started out from a little family with help of his stepfather, and conquered and united the whole mongolia. How do you think he has the man power and economy to conquer almost the whole Europe without his people liking him? Obviously he has loyal generals and was well supported by his people.

and one more thing, Ghengis khan conquered most of Europe, vast parts of russia without reading a single book.

Yes Mongol people liked him. But what about Han people, what about European, and russia? If they all supported this emperor well, why the empire falled just 100 years later.

[XiangYu]

yea..elections don't usually result in great leaders to rise. Presidential delegates can easily say a bunch of bluff to get the people to believe in them, and won't do any of it once they become the president. Usually great leaders merge from 亂世.

[Guest Cipher]

Genghis Khan rules! He could kick 秦始皇's pigu all the way to Poland.

关公战秦琼, ^_^. If I were a commander of a 10000-soldier modern army, I could kick 成吉思汗's pigu all the way to the Moon.

[XiangYu]

If I were a commander of a 10000-soldier modern army, I could kick 成吉思汗's pigu all the way to the Moon.

what does the army consist of? air support? ground units? tanks? or pure ground INFANTRY??

[XiangYu]

Yes Mongol people liked him. But what about Han people, what about European, and russia? If they all supported this emperor well, why the empire falled just 100 years later.

FIrst of all, Mongols did NOT attack during the HAN period, they attacked during the SONG period. Second, of course the Song people hated Ghengis Khan. How would you think if some foreign country attacked your homeland? Wouldn't you wnat to drive them out? I'm surprised that Yuan dynasty can even last 100 years, considering they are a minority group and the rest of the SONG people hate them.

[Guest Cipher]

>>China might get on capitalist path 1000 years ago......

It has always been before 1949.

By saying that, I meant it's 儒术 made China's feudalization so perfect and strong, which suppressed the natural developing of capitalism. Just think about 1000 years ago, when the capital of Song annouced it had more than 1 million citizen, the whole Europe was still living in the darkness of the middle age. But why there was no industrialization occurred in China thruout the next 1000 years?

[Guest Cipher]

Yes Mongol people liked him. But what about Han people, what about European, and russia? If they all supported this emperor well, why the empire falled just 100 years later.

FIrst of all, Mongols did NOT attack during the HAN period, they attacked during the SONG period.

Dont get me wrong. I meant Hanzhu ren 汉族. And that just proves you cannot use how Mongol people liked him as supporting evidence, since he was a ruler of such a compound empire.

[Guest Cipher]

Genghis Khan sure was a great leader for his people - the Mongols :)Though I wouldn't agree that he conquered most of Europe - and certainly not the most advanced regions (though his successors might have been able to conquer the rest of Europe).

If you come to (Outer) Mongolia' date=' you can see that he is admired as founder of the Mongolian nation, greatest hero etc. His rule also brought the first mongolian script, a constitution and the decimal army organisation. His face is on the bigger banknotes, on several wodka labels and anywhere else you could imagine. Even 70 years of frowning upon the Khans under soviet rule couldn't change this admiration.

So I think he was indeed a great leader. But maybe not for the chinese people.[/quote']

Couldn't agree more

[Guest Cipher]

Ian_Lee, Sun was rather a 精神领袖 than an actual leader. BTW, how to say 精神领袖 in English, spiritual leader?

[XiangYu]

i gotcha.. sorry for misunderstanding XD

yea thats true, when china was very strong the europeans were still barbarians and savages. For example, ZHu GE LIang invented the 連驽 and mines during the SanGuo period, thats about 250AD. When did the other countries started to make that?

also, there was a legend saying that the Chinese had built the largest naval fleet on the face of the planet around 1400's and circumnavigated the globe. (That is 200 years before the first Europeans to navigate the globe) As a result, we were so disgusted by what we saw around the world that we decided to destroy all our ships and said never to have anything to do with the outside world.

[Guest Wuliao]

Yes Mongol people liked him. But what about Han people' date=' what about European, and russia? If they all supported this emperor well, why the empire falled just 100 years later.[/quote']

FIrst of all, Mongols did NOT attack during the HAN period, they attacked during the SONG period.

Dont get me wrong. I meant Hanzhu ren 汉族. And that just proves you cannot use how Mongol people liked him as supporting evidence, since he was a ruler of such a compound empire.

Genghis was a Mongolian. A bloodthirsty pyschopath at that. If anyone could claim him as a "Chinese" leader, then why not Japanese or Korean leaders who were influenced by Sincization at certain periods of history?

It is not matter of popularity but of separate soverignty. Manchuria had merged with Han China and thus any mixed blood emperor would have some legitmacy as a Chinese leader - such as Qianlong etc. The Yuan Dynasty is widely regarded as an occupying force that had refused to assimilate.

Does Spain, France, Britian, etc. acknowledge Julius Caesar as THEIR great leader?

[Guest Wuliao]

yea..elections don't usually result in great leaders to rise. Presidential delegates can easily say a bunch of bluff to get the people to believe in them, and won't do any of it once they become the president. Usually great leaders merge from 亂世.

You would have to able to believe in the BS in the first place and most people are NOT that guillible or irrational (except perhaps the ppl who believe Saddam played a pivotal role in 9/11). If someone can convince me through persuasiveness rather than force, then power to the person.

Good leaders exist in peace time too - I admire Chen Shui Bian for his uncompromising stance on organized crime but not for his drive for independence. Great leaders can effect geunine lasting and progressive changes in their civil societies (Martin Luther King).

[XiangYu]

Genghis was a Mongolian. A bloodthirsty pyschopath

support why u said he is a "bloodthristy psychopath" what did he do that makes u think he's a psychopath. Because he wanted to conquer the world?

It is not matter of popularity but of separate soverignty

if ghengis khan did not earn popularity of his people, he would never have accomplished half as much as he did. Think about it, he had the whole support of the MOngolians, except for some rebellions at the very beginning.

Assimilating the enemy that Ghengis Khan conquered is another thing. I agree with you that people he conquered hated him. It is just like if some foreign country took over your homeland, you would not be loyal to them either.

[Guest Wuliao]

i gotcha.. sorry for misunderstanding XD

yea thats true' date=' when china was very strong the europeans were still barbarians and savages. For example, ZHu GE LIang invented the 連驽 and mines during the SanGuo period, thats about 250AD. When did the other countries started to make that?

also, there was a legend saying that the Chinese had built the largest naval fleet on the face of the planet around 1400's and circumnavigated the globe. (That is 200 years before the first Europeans to navigate the globe) As a result, we were so disgusted by what we saw around the world that we decided to destroy all our ships and said never to have anything to do with the outside world.[/quote']

Year 2004AD: to the West, Chinese are barbarians for eating dogs and other aspects of Chinese culture. Wasn't it Sun Yat Sen who smashed some stones because it was an affront to his God? Chinese religion (excluding Buddhism) remains stigmatized as being inferior or primitive, esp. the practice of "idolatory", offering joss sticks etc. Despite of all of China's scientific progress, it is still behind the West. That's a fact.

Civilisation remains a matter of perspective - to each his own I say. If you don't understand something, doesnt mean it is, by default, wrong.

Historians cannot discern the motive for stopping the Ming navy expeditions with any certainity - it is my assumption that they were disappointed to find anything of interest (to the Ming Dynasty) out there that they didnt already have, like exotic animals / technology etc.

[Guest Wuliao]

Genghis was a Mongolian. A bloodthirsty pyschopath

support why u said he is a "bloodthristy psychopath" what did he do that makes u think he's a psychopath. Because he wanted to conquer the world?

The raping, killing, pillaging etc. in general and more specifically didnt he say something about the pleasure of killing of another man and taking pleasure in his wife etc. The skull heaps etc.

It is not matter of popularity but of separate soverignty

if ghengis khan did not earn popularity of his people, he would never have accomplished half as much as he did. Think about it, he had the whole support of the MOngolians, except for some rebellions at the very beginning.

Assimilating the enemy that Ghengis Khan conquered is another thing. I agree with you that people he conquered hated him. It is just like if some foreign country took over your homeland, you would not be loyal to them either.

I was making the point that he was NOT a Chinese leader. Napoleon is not an Italian or German leader either. So a composite empire doesnt mean anything when national identities emerge.

Separatist cultural EVOLUTION seems pretty silly to me. I mean to what end? Going to war because you worship the same god but in a different fashion? Did you know that several specific cultural identities were "only" formed a thousand years ago and some want soverignity based on that? Thank goodness, mainland China did not splinter off after WWII; otherwise it would be like another Europe. Leave the competition to academiae, commerce and sports.

[nnt]

It's interesting to see how a topic on Chinese leaders has become a debate on Chinese leaders...

[yan]

Ian Lee: I think the Kyrgyz consider Genghis Khan a national leader, too; and some Japanese believe he was actually some japanese Prince who was forced to emigrate in the early 13th century.

As long as we can agree that he was as Chinese as he was Kazakh, I'd say there is no need to argue

I think the 'Mausoleum' in the Ordos was originally built by Mongols. Following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan_Mausoleum , it was first replaced with a permanent structure by a Japanese colonel, and in 1956 the PRC built todays mausoleum. Both were destroyed during the cultural revolution

[yan]

WuLiao: I don't think Genghis was much worse than other 'great' leaders before and after him. Think of the crusaders, some of whom have remained popular in Europe until today (e.g. Richard Lionheart or Friedrich Barbarossa), Charlemagne or Alexander the Great (in Iran also known as Alexander the Devil) etc. Or think of the wars Qianlong led against the Oirat Mongols. All of them would be really bad war criminals by today's accounts.

[Guest Wuliao]

Killing for conquest and killing for personal pleasure differentiates a power mad warlord and a psychopath.

[yan]

I don't think Genghis was more psychotic than the other leaders I mentioned. Extreme ruthless, but not a psycho. Maybe the Mongols seemed to be a bunch of psychos for some of the peoples they conquered. But that is no difference to the other leaders either.