During the Three Kingdoms period, the complex relationship between Yuan Shu and Yuan Shao is shown in the picture. Both were the sons of Yuan Feng, but because Yuan Cheng had no children, Yuan Shao was adopted as a son. According to the patriarchal law, Yuan Shao is Yuan Shu's cousin, but in terms of blood, Yuan Shu is a son-in-law, and Yuan Shao is just a concubine. Yuan Shu's sphere of influence at the time of the uprising was larger, occupying the states of Yu, You, Xu, and He, and forming a dispute with Yuan Shao.
The distribution of Yuan Shu's power covered Gongsun Zhan's Youzhou, Tao Qian's Xuzhou, Sun Jian's Yuzhou, and Zhang Yan's Bingzhou. In contrast, Yuan Shao mastered half of Jizhou, Yanzhou of his childhood friend Cao Cao, and Jingzhou of his ally Liu Biao. Among the 13 states at the end of the Han Dynasty, the Yuan brothers raised their arms and said, and seven states responded. The definition of a child of a wealthy family is vividly reflected in Yuan Shao, and Yuan Shu is a leader among wealthy families.
However, the battles of Guandu, Chibi and even Yiling in the first three kingdoms were not as thrilling as the "2 Yuan Struggle for Hegemony". The failure to grasp such a large force is not due to misdistribution. The Yuan family behaved quite reasonably in terms of distribution.
Judging by the difficulty of his rise, Yuan Shu's route was relatively simple: his hometown of Yangzhou was the richest and most populous place in the Eastern Han Dynasty. As long as Sun Jian can be solved, he will be able to master the two Huai, and then clean up Tao Qian and control the land of the four states. In the end, you can march to Liu Biao, after all, part of Jingzhou also belongs to Yuan Shu's territory.
In contrast, Yuan Shao's difficulty is much greater. He needs to break through the layers of encirclement, there is Gongsun Zan who occupies Youyou and Ji in the north, Cao Cao who is always ready to receive help in the south, Zhang Yan of the Montenegrin army who constantly attacks Yecheng in the east, and Tao Qian, Liu Bei, Bai Bonu and so on in the west.
The most criticized issue for Yuan Shu was the timing of becoming emperor. The situation at that time was: after Tao Qian's death, Xuzhou was divided into four pieces by Liu Bei, Lü Bu, Chen Deng, and Zang Ba. Li Dao and Guo Yan in the middle are fighting, and Ma Teng in the west has not yet developed. Cao Cao only controlled one and a half states, and he also belonged to Yuan Shao's general.
At this time, Yuan Shu already owned two states (Yang and Yu), plus the nominal Sun family (after pacifying Jiangdong, Zhou Yu returned to Shouchun as an official for a few months), and the other comparable strengths may only be Liu Zhang of Yizhou and Liu Biao of Jingzhou. The situation has formed a pattern of four parts of the world: two Yuan and two Liu.
Although Yuan Shao controls two-thirds of the territory, Yuan Shu feels that 90% of the world's surname is Yuan, and the rest is only a problem of part of the cake in the family. For him, being the emperor is a way to expand his influence, and it is the first to strike. The final key to the duel between the two sons of a wealthy family was that Yuan Shu overestimated his control over his subordinates, and once the Sun family became independent, his situation became precarious.
From another point of view, in 196 AD, does Cao Cao's welcome back to Liu Xie mean that he can dominate the world?Between 195 and 196, did Sun Ce's domination of Jiangdong mean that he was able to dominate the south?And in 197 AD, does Yuan Shao's defeat of Gongsun Chan mean that he has mastered the land of Sizhou?
In fact, at that time, Cao Cao was still Yuan Shao's younger brother, Yuan Shao had just recovered Qing and Hebei prefectures, and Sun Ce's appointment still needed to consult Yuan Shu. It's hard to tell these twists and turns in romances**, movies, or other history books, but they hint in advance who the protagonist is. Without these hints, even you might think you can be a Son of Heaven.
Yuan Shu's misjudgment of the situation actually reflects the normalcy of ordinary people. We've all played Monopoly 4 and are no strangers to "hot-seat gameplay". The rule is that the player's initial bankroll is divided equally, and the ownership of assets is determined by rolling the dice (luck). Even if you're unlucky, you can still change the situation with items such as natural disasters, treasure chests, and **. However, in the end, there will only be one winner in the game, and the others will be destitute.
The English name of the game "monopoly" literally translates to "monopoly", and private manufacturing has become this "monopoly". No matter how balanced the system is, there will still be only one winner in the end of the game, and everyone else will be destitute. The core reason for this phenomenon is private ownership, whether it is real estate, ** shops or restaurants purchased in the game, they are all privately owned.
No matter how fair the system is, there can only be one winner in the end, and the rest will be destitute. This is similar to competition in real life, and if there is no competition, is there any point in continuing to play?
In fact, the original intention of the game makers is shown in the image below. But if all assets are confiscated and competition is not allowed, everyone's funds are equal, but the fun of the game is lost. It's like all assets have been confiscated and no competition is allowed. When everyone's funds are equal, common wealth (poverty) will be achieved. But the question is, would you still play this game if there wasn't competition?
Driven by human nature, it is impossible to achieve common prosperity through equalization. Even if the world's wealth is divided equally, within ten years, most people will still not be able to keep it. Because human beings are born with differences, whether it is appearance, height or IQ, etc., may become a new measure of wealth.
There are only two ways to achieve common prosperity: one is to expand the internal cake, and the other is to continue to pursue a broader journey if it cannot be achieved. This is just like our journey is the sea of stars, in order to find the true road to common prosperity.
In this article, an in-depth analysis of the battle for hegemony between Yuan Shu and Yuan Shao is carried out, presenting the political pattern of the Three Kingdoms period and the different fates of the children of the two wealthy families. Through a detailed historical background introduction, the article vividly depicts the complex situation of Yuan Shu and Yuan Shao in terms of power distribution, family relations, and political struggles.
First of all, the article clearly shows the family relationship between Yuan Shu and Yuan Shao through diagrams, explaining the differences between them in terms of patriarchy and bloodline. This exhaustive explanation makes it easier for the reader to understand the intricate relationship between the two giants, laying the groundwork for subsequent analysis.
Secondly, through the comparison of Yuan Shu and Yuan Shao's spheres of influence, the article vividly describes the regional competition and game between the two. Yuan Shu's control of the states of Yu, You, Xu, and Ji, as well as his alliances with forces such as Gongsun Zhan, Tao Qian, and Sun Jian, demonstrated his ambition in terms of power and expansion of his sphere of influence. Yuan Shao, on the other hand, faced the pressure of being surrounded by Gongsun Zan in the north, Cao Cao in the south, and Zhang Yan in the east, which made his rise more tortuous.
The article also provides an in-depth analysis of the timing of Yuan Shu's claim to be emperor, pointing out that the reason why Yuan Shu failed to succeed was because he overestimated the control of his subordinates, especially the independence of the Sun family, which made his situation precarious. This meticulous excavation of historical details presents the reader with the complexity of the political situation at the time and highlights Yuan Shu's missteps in the issue of becoming emperor.
In addition, the article provokes deep reflections on human nature, competition, and resource allocation by looking at historical events from a different perspective, as well as analogies of the Monopoly 4 game. Through the discussion of private ownership and monopoly, the article proposes two ways to achieve common prosperity: one is to expand the internal cake, and the other is to pursue a broader journey. These perspectives provoke a reflection on social institutions and economic mechanisms, making the article more enlightening.
In general, this article not only shows the twists and turns of the struggle for hegemony through a detailed interpretation of historical events, but also presents a rich and colorful historical picture for readers through in-depth thinking about human nature and social mechanisms.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!