【龙腾网】你认为曹操是“恶人”或是“坏人”吗?
正文翻译
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：凌☆♂宇 转载请注明出处
是坏人：31票，占比26％
不是坏人：89票，占比74％
评论翻译
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：凌☆♂宇 转载请注明出处
Personally, I don''''t think he''''s that bad of a guy. In the novel, he just seems really evil because he''''s the antagonist (I''''m not saying he was a virtuous guy by any means, but I just don''''t think he was evil.) But still, he greatly respected both Liu Bei and Guan Yu, and even lamented Guan Yu''''s death after Sun Quan (out of the 3 rulers, I definitely dislike Sun Quan the most :P) had him executed. He never wanted to fight Liu Bei either, but when it becomes obvious that someone''''s in the way of your goal, what can you do? :P He also seemed pretty loyal to the Han.
就我个人而言，我不认为他是个坏家伙。在小说中，他被描述的很邪恶，只是因为他是刘备的对手(我不是说他是一个善良的人，我只是不认为他是邪恶的)，但他仍然十分敬重刘备和关羽，甚至在孙权处死关羽之后(在这三位执政者中，我最不喜欢孙权了)，他还为关羽的死而悲叹。他也没想把刘备当做敌人，但如果换做是你，你发现有人挡了你的路时，你又会怎么做呢?另外，从某种意义上来讲，他对汉室也还算是忠诚。
I hate to say it, but during war, I think one has to be cold-hearted and obxtive sometimes. Cao Cao wasn''''t such a nice guy, but he was a very firm and good leader. Liu Bei was a very nice guy, but he was only an average leader, nothing remarkable. I''''d say Sun Quan was about an average a leader as Liu Bei, as his father and brother already did a lot of the work for him, and he did just as many bad things as Cao Cao did, which is why I don''''t like him.
有一句话，我一直不太喜欢，但也不得不承认它很有道理——在战争中，领导者必须以大局为重。 曹操不是一个好人，但他是一个好的领导者。刘备是一个好人，但他只是一个普通的领导者。至于孙权，我认为他和刘备一样，也是个普通的领导者，只是因为他的父亲和哥哥已经为他打下了很好的基础。但他做的坏事和曹操一样多，所以我不喜欢他。
I disagree that he is always portayed as evil from the game perspective. Sure, he had his bad ways, especially regarding his plotting from the Han court, but really seems to be just a darker version of the hero Liu Bei.
我不太同意在三国游戏中，总是把曹操描述成一个反派角色。当然，他的确做了很多坏事，尤其是他想从汉廷手中夺权，但他和刘备其实是相似的，只不过手段要更阴暗些罢了。
The way I think of it, if Cao Cao was evil, why did he reject the title of Emperor? He was loyal to the Han until the end of his life. Another thing is that Cao Cao drew men of great honor and dignity and worth to him (Zhang Liao, Xu Huang, Dian Wei etc). How could such an evil tyrant have such honor following him? I don''''t condone everything that Cao Cao did, but I can condone the fact that he never claimed to be virtuous. Liu Bei, on the other hand, did claim to be virtuous but he did many deeds that were wrong. I hate a hypocrite.
如果曹操是一个邪恶的坏人，那么他为什么不篡位自己当皇帝呢?因为他是忠于汉室的。另一方面，曹操自己能招揽到许多很有声望、品德崇高、能力超群的人(如张辽、徐晃、典韦等)。如果他是一个邪恶的暴君，怎么会有这么多人追随他呢?曹操做的许多事的确让人无法宽恕，但他也从来没有声称自己是个善良的人。另一方面，刘备自称是贤明君主，但他却犯了许多错误。我讨厌伪君子。
And another thing, Cao Cao was a brilliant military leader. If you took all strategists out of the picture, Liu Bei wouldn''''t stand a chance against Cao Cao''''s military genius (actually, Liu Bei was pretty stupid in this area). For this, Cao Cao also gains my respect. In my opinion, Sun Jian would have made the best ruler out of everyone. Ah! Woe to the Han, that a man such as Sun Jian would die so early!!! :cry:
曹操还是一位杰出的军事领袖。如果把两人手下的谋士们都排除在外，刘备在曹操这个军事天才面前毫无胜算(事实上，刘备在军事方面的确相当愚蠢)。单是在这方面，曹操就值得我们尊敬了。 在我看来，孙坚应该是所有人当中最好的统治者。唉！像孙坚这样的人会如此短命，真是汉朝的不幸！！哭~
just like Liu Bei really - a hero of the time. Anything he could do to further his conquest and bring peace and prosperity back to the Han people. I wish the DW series would stop painting Cao as excessively evil and make someone like Sun Quan evil instead
曹操就像刘一样，是一个真正的时代英雄。他所做的一切都是为了更好的统治这个国家，为汉人带来和平与繁荣。我希望真三国无双系列不要再丑化曹操了，孙权才是应该作为反派的那个人。
We are not talking about history or the book, simply the game...
我们讨论人物的好坏，如果不是基于史实和小说，而是基于真三国无双这款游戏的话……
The game shows Cao Cao as evil no matter how you look at it, it does show his son as even worse however. Of all the characters shown as bad Guys I would rank it like this:
在游戏中，曹操是个坏人，他的儿子比他还要坏。在所有的反派角色中，我给他们做了一个排序:
1 Dong Zhou: He''''s basically made into the worst chauvanist and most disresepctful person possible
1 董卓:他被塑造成了一个暴君和最不讲礼节的人 。
2 Sima Yi: especially in DW5 he is drawn as extremely manipulative and just waiting for the right time to turn traitor.
2 司马懿:在真三国无双中，他被描绘成一个一直等待着时机的野心家。
3 Cao Pi: MAde into a character who is extremely full of himself, and has no respect for any of the rival nations. Additionally he is charecterized as not really caring about the Wei dynasty as much as he''''s just trying to make a name for himself. In his ending movie he very directly gives Sima Yi permission to do whatever he wants after he dies.
3 曹丕:他被塑造成一个极端自负，不尊重任何敌国的人。此外，曹丕也不在乎魏国，他只在乎自己的名声。在曹丕的结局CG动画中，他允许司马懿在他死后做任何想做的事情。
4 Cao Cao: Very Questionable kind of guy. He just does what''''s neccessary to succeed at his goals. Besides directly opposing Liu Bei, his followers (especially at Chang Ban) will always question whether or not they really have to kill civillians, to which he always replies, "do whatever is neccessary"
4 曹操:他是个很多疑的人，他所做的一些都只是为了实现自己的目标而已。除了讨伐刘备以外，他的追随者们(尤其是在长坂坡)还会质疑他们是否真的要杀害平民，而曹操总是回答说:“当断则断。”
5 Lu Bu: More of a troublemaker then anything, He is drawn by Diao Chan as a greatly misunderstood man, that, despite the fact that he saved China from Dong Zhou, is hated by everybody, for something that he did in his past.
5 吕布:他是一个很会惹是生非的人，在貂蝉口中，他一直在被人误解，尽管他杀死了董卓，但他的一系列行为却依旧让人不齿，所以所有人都恨他。
6 Zhang Jiao: more dissillusioned then anything. He thinks and deeply believes he is doing the right thing, but crosses the line when lives are expended.
That''''s how I rate the people interpreted as vilains by Dynasty Warriors.
6 张角:他是最清醒的人。他深信自己在做正确的事情，但当他感觉自己大限将至的时候，就做了些不那么理智的事。
这就是我对这些反派们的评价，而这些人在真三国无双之中是被描述成十足的坏人。
Evil or not I think nobody can denie that Cao Cao was a great man, prolly the greatest ruler and figure during the 3 kingdoms era. Cao Cao''''s someone who''''s always looking towards the bigger picture, his method may sometimes seems cruel but they are effective and for the greater good of the land and people.
我想没有人能否认曹操是一个伟人，他是三国时代最伟大的统治者。 曹操是一个总能着眼于大局的人，他的方法有时可能看起来很残忍，但确实十分有效。他所做的一切都是为了国家和人民的利益。
Anyways, for my part I make my assessment of Cao Cao based on his own assessments of the leaders of the time. By the time of Cao''''s and Liu Bei''''s meeting, there were only two true heroes - those two. With the end Gongsun Zan and the fall of the Han loyalist rally, Cao was the one best able to end the choas and stabilize the nation for years to come - a title he held alone until Chibi. Cao''''s ways were not always admirable, but perhaps that is not the point - he always acted for the "greater good", that being the sake of China. Liu Bei was the same. So I say that both were champions for "good" and heroes of China.
我对曹操的印象很大程度上受到了他“煮酒论英雄”的影响。当曹操和刘备这两人相遇的时候，曹操眼中真正的英雄只有两个——就是他自己和刘备。随着公孙瓒和其他一些汉朝保皇党的覆灭，曹操成了最有能力扫清这个乱世并在接下来的几年里一统天下的人——直到赤壁之战前。他的手段并不怎么令人钦佩，但这并不是重点——他的行为是为了整个国家的利益。而刘备也和他一样。 所以我说，他们都是伟人，都是英雄。
In SGYY (not in real history) Liu Bei is a leader who continally shows ambition to restore the Han, but also has the ambition to be compassionate to everyone who is of similar mind. He constantly does things which actually undermine his plans in order to show his benevolence, (like when he''''s trying to stay best friends with Liu Zhong in Shu and his generals are trying to do away with him, also when he''''s refusing the different gifts which are given to him- Liu Biao offering his city and kongming constantly trying to parsuade him to become emporer). I feel though, on the other hand, that Cao Cao was simply ambitious to the point of being outrageously selfish, surplanting the emporer''''s power, killing the empress and installing his own kin into the court in order to gradually userp the throne of Han and start his own line as a new dynasty.
在三国演义中(不是在真实的历史中)，刘备是一个领导者，他想要匡扶汉室，并且有自己的野心，但他也尊重其他有野心的诸侯们。他仁慈的行为经常破坏他自己的计划,(刘备在蜀中想要和刘璋友好相处，但他手下的将军们却想要抢夺刘璋的地盘。刘备还拒绝了刘表提供给他的城池，孔明多次劝说他称帝也被他否决了)。 另一方面,曹操也同样有野心，但他却自私到了极点。他蚕食皇帝的权力，杀死了皇后，在朝廷中安插自己的亲信来把控朝政，让整个朝廷成为他的囊中之物。
Hmm Cao Cao is kind of paranoid...i say it''''s a common when people achive to high position, it''''s harder to them to let it go. he become very suspicious..afraid that someday someone will killed or coup de etat him. The other regard of Cao Cao''''s mistake decision (besides Xu Zhou''''s incident) is he ordered Xun Yu to killed himself. Cao Cao become blind and hunger of power. He saw Xun Yu as an obstacle. He did not see what Xun Yu have done in the past. i admired Xun Yu. besides Jia Xu, he''''s Wei top stategists.
嗯……曹操变的有些被害妄想……我觉得这是一个很正常的现象，当人们取得了较高的地位，就很难放弃。曹操因此变得很多疑，害怕早晚有一天，会有人杀死自己。 曹操所做的另一个错误决定(除了徐州事件之外)是他赐死荀彧。曹操对权力的渴望让他变得盲目，他把荀彧看作是一个障碍，而忽视了荀彧以前对他的帮助。我很喜欢荀彧，他是除了贾诩之外，魏国最高明的政治家。
I''''ve seen this thread a number of times and have always held off from posting in it because it''''s always so difficult to fit a living, breathing human being into a stereotype of "good" or "evil". But after thinking about it for a bit, I''''m ready to weigh in. Yes, some of Cao Cao''''s policies had beneficial results for China. The North and Central areas of the country were strengthened and recovered more quickly from the ravages of the civil war; and yes, a strong, central authority - no matter that it was usurped - helped stabilize the situation. My assessment of Cao Cao then is this: he was profoundly disturbed by the ineffectuality of the Latter Han government, their chaos, corruption and general uselessness. Cao Cao definitely seems to have been shaped strongly by an early experience with a government that had little control and was full of excess and disorder. However, he ended up by taking his mania for control and order too far - it became more than just a noble goal and became a sort of mania. The agricultural camps, with displaced families and population, the slaughter in Xu province, the growing desire for more honor and recognition for himself - he became full of himself, and over-enamored of himself and his own accomplishments. Evil, on examination, is essentially selfishness taken to the extreme. Cao Cao certainly meets that criteria, I think. He upon the innocent populace of Xu province and coerced the death of a great and faithful adviser.
我之前已经看过这个帖子很多次了，但我不太愿意回帖，因为要把一个活生生的人归入“好”或“坏”的刻板印象是很难的。但是我考虑了一会儿之后，还是决定写点什么。 曹操的一些政策对整个中国而言是有益的。国家的北部和中部地区得到了良好的治理，并更快地从内战的破坏当中恢复过来;一个强大的集权政府——不管它是否被曹操篡夺了——它都稳定了局势。 我对当时的曹操的评价是:他对东汉政府的无能、混乱、腐败和无能深感不安。
曹操的性格显然是在早期经历的影响下形成的，当时的东汉政权已经名存实亡，诸侯割据，狼烟四起。然而，他对权力和秩序的渴望最终还是变质了——他从最初是为了追寻一个崇高的目标，到后来变的是对权利极端的狂热。他屠杀了徐州百姓，使无数人流离失所，而这都些都源于他内心深处日益膨胀的野心——他成为了一个极度自私、自恋、自大的人。 事实说明，邪恶的本质，就是自私到了极点。我认为曹操当然符合这个标准。他对无辜的徐州百姓犯下了不可饶恕的罪行，他还导致了一位汉朝忠臣的死亡。
Cao Cao''''s actions may have had a lot of good consequences for China in the long run, but that was largely accidental - to me, his aims seem to have been more motivated by self-interest - that the great Cao Cao had staved off disorder and restored peace. Sometimes even a bad decision can have good results, but that doesn''''t mean we should praise the decision. Cao Cao was not a monster or a caricature - he was a human being, and he does show sympathy for others at times. But his ambition eventually becomes the dominant aspect of his personality, at least insofar as history records him, and given the atrocities he committed I have to side with the "Cao Cao is bad" side of the argument. It isn''''t that simple, of course, but in the end that''''s where I have to place him.
从长远来看，曹操的行为可能对中国产生了很多好的影响，但这在很大程度上是偶然的——对我来说，曹操避免了混乱，恢复了和平，但他的目的似乎更多是出于自身利益。有时候，即使是一个糟糕的决定也会有好的结果，但这并不意味着我们应该称赞这个决定。曹操不是怪物，也不是漫画人物，他是一个人，他也有同情心，但他的野心最终成为了他性格中最主要的部分，基于历史对他的记录，再考虑到他犯下的暴行，我不得不站在“曹操是坏人”这一边。当然，对一个人的评判没有这么简单，不过我还是觉得他是坏人。
I would say he is evil and good :wink: Because he is evil for manipulating the emperor of the Han dynasty. but he was good because he knew he could bring order and the Han dynasty was dying out so he is both depends what is the greater good/ as in a good government by Cao Cao or a loyal to an empire that has ruled for 400 years it depends how you look at it.
我觉得曹操既是善良的，也是邪恶的。 他挟持汉朝皇帝这个行为是很恶劣的。但是他也是个好人,因为他知道他完全可以改朝换代，建立新的国家，但他没有这样做。 在建立一个新政权，还是忠于一个已经统治了这片土地400年的旧帝国的选择中，曹操做出了对自己最有利的选择。所以，如何评判曹操，取决于你从哪个角度看待他。
My opinion on Cao Cao as greatly change over time. I used to think he was a villian and an evil bastard. But now I see him in a different light. Cao Cao is like the Napoleon of China. In my view, Cao Cao is the one people looked to to put an end to the chaos in China. Anyone who wanted that done joined Cao Cao. In the beginning people saw Cao Cao as the savior of China. And he did as much as he could to do that.
随着时间的推移，我对曹操的看法发生了很大的变化。 以前我认为他是个邪恶的混蛋。但现在我对他有了不同的看法。 曹操就像中国的拿破仑。 在我看来，曹操是一个想要扫平乱世的人。有很多和他有共同理想的人在追随他。最初，人们的确把曹操看作是这个乱世的救星。而他也尽其所能地做到这一点。
I don''''t know why people judges a person simply by fictional tales on a person. Take QinShiHuang, most people regarded him as a tyrant who kills mercilessly and used hundreds of thousands into slave labour to build the great wall, burnt languages other than the Qin Language and killed Scholars who opposed him. Does that really make him bad? I personally think there is a reason to all his done, like stablilty, Uniting the entire nation as one (No different language== less division), security (Great wall to defend against Barbarians). CaoCao was no different. Although he was protraited in the novel to be rutheless, self-centered and tyrany, he was unifying the nation and bringing peace and prosprity. Regardless of how evil his intentions might be, he was doing a greater good.
我不知道为什么很多人会仅通过虚构的故事来判断一个人。以秦始皇为例，大多数人认为他是一个残酷杀戮的暴君，命令成千上万的奴隶建造了长城，烧毁了除秦语以外的其他语言，杀死了反对他的学者。这真的让他成为一个暴君了吗？我个人认为他所做的一切都是有目的的，比如维护国家稳定，统一整个国家(统一的语言会让国家不那么容易分裂)，保证人民安全(建造抵御北方匈奴人的长城)。 曹操也不例外。尽管他在小说中被描绘成一个自私、自利、专制的人，但他却统一了国家，为人民带来了和平与繁荣。不管他的意图有多邪恶，他都在做一件伟大的善事。
Uniting the land under one rule is a very strange thing to do, (to me especially) because I''''m an English man, Europe is a bunch of seperate countries with seperate ideals and seperate languages, it doesn''''t make us all enemies though. Europeans generally are good friends and can trade and everything with each other, without the need to destroy the other cultures in question. I know that in the past different European countries tried to take over each other and destroy their dieties and languages, just for territory, power and empire, but luckily none of them really suceeded, meaning that we can all appreciate difference in culture, language and prosper together without the need to kill each other just because one and other are different. Burning other people''''s languages is unacceptable, as is murder. If Qin was such a wonderful man who could get people to follow him, and make people believe in united systems, and a united China, then those other countries would have simply given up and joined him, knowing that it was the logical, and the right thing to do. But it wasn''''t- He destroyed many facinating cultures and ideals which were just contradictory to what he thought.
把一片土地统一在一个国家下是一件很奇怪的事情，(尤其是对我来说)因为我是一个英国人，欧洲是一群分离的国家，有着不同的理想和不同的语言，但这并不会让我们彼此之间成为敌人。欧洲人之间通常都是朋友关系，他们可以互相贸易，不需要破坏其他文化。我知道在过去的某些年代，一些欧洲国家试图攻占并摧毁其他国家的文明，只是为了获得更大的领土，拥有更大的权力，建立更大的帝国。但幸运的是没有人真正的成功。也就是说，我们可以做到欣赏不同的语言和文化并共同繁荣，而不需要因为文化的差异性而杀死对方。 焚烧他人的语言是不可接受的，屠杀也是如此。如果秦国是一个十分了不起的国家，那么它自然能得到别国人民的尊崇，让人们信奉一个统一的制度，信奉一个统一的中国，那么其他国家也就会放弃抵抗，成为秦国的一部分，这是合乎逻辑的，也是明智的选择。但事实并非如此，秦国摧毁了许多令人着迷的文化和理想，仅仅因为这些文化和理想都与秦国的理念背道而驰。
I''''m not here to talk politics and about human rights about the present time, but about the ancient war-torn China. If you experience war for everyday of your life, with Barbarians at the north raiding your homes, and warlords constantly attacking each other for their own benefits, what would you hope? Unification is one of the most important things for a country especially in the Asian nation. Stand together you grow stronger and have your identity. If some foreign nations are divding your country, say making English into little pieces, what would you do?
我们现在谈的不是基于当今的政治和人权，而是在饱受战争蹂躏的古代中国。试想一下，如果你每天都经历战争，北方的野蛮人袭击你的家园，军阀们为了自己的利益不断互相攻伐，你会希望什么? 统一是每个国家，尤其是亚洲国家最重要的事情之一。只有国家统一，才能使国力更加强大，民众才会彼此认同。如果一些国家正在瓜分你的国家，比如把英国分成小块，你会怎么做?
In the past when there was massive strife between tribes in the regions which are now China, it''''s a different issue entirely- You are right to say that someone had to come along to change things for the better, to stop the war and hopefully live in peace. I just think it''''s really sad that it had to be brought about with slaughter, which is what Qin Shih Huang Di was responsible for. Maybe you''''re right that at the time it was impossible to use democracy or hard to avoid war, but it''''s still sad those people had to die because they were just from a different tribe than Qin himself. The other thing that I think is regretful is that to be honest Qin Shih Huang Di managed to perform a lot of reforming deeds, but didn''''t really bring peace to his land- all those people sent to the wall to die, all those people who were destroyed under the wheels of what he would say is "progress".
在过去，中国这个地方有很多的诸侯国，各国之间有大规模的冲突，这是一个与现在完全不同的局面。你说得对，必须有人来把局面变得更好，停止战争，让民众生活在和平与希望中。而我觉得非常可悲的是，等待他们的却是一场屠杀，当然这也是秦始皇的责任。也许你的说法是对的，当时那个年代不可能使用民主的方式统一全国，也很难避免战争，但这些人却必须要死，因为他们来自于秦国以外的国家。另一件我觉得遗憾的事是，秦始皇所做的那些改革，并没有给他的土地带来和平——这些人死在了修建长城的过程中，而在后人看来，这些人的死亡，却被称之为是一种时代的“进步”。
The events of Cao Cao killing Lu Boshe and his family and Liu Fu prior to Red Cliffs are both fictrional events from the novel. Personally, I don''''t think Cao Cao was "bad" or "evil". The worst act I can think that he ever did was the Xuzhou massacre while leaving the campaign. He did many positive things that outweigh that, though, such as improving the quality of life for farmers and peasants in his territory, and he was very fair towards his officers, and usually tried to recruit captured officers before resorting to execution. Compared to the acts of men like Dong Zhuo or Gongsun Zan, he doesn''''t compare.
在赤壁之战前，曹操杀死吕伯奢及其家人和刘馥的事件都是小说虚构的。 就我个人而言，我不认为曹操是“坏的”或“邪恶的”。我所能想到的他做过的最糟糕的事情就是屠杀了徐州的百姓。但是，尽管曹操所犯下的罪行，他还做了更多对人民有益的事，例如他改善了他领土上的人民的生活质量、对自己手下的将领非常公正、在杀死敌军被俘的将领前，还对他们进行招募。与董卓、公孙瓒等人的行为相比，他简直是一代明主。
The Man was many things, including, perhaps, a usurper of the throne in all but name. But I think any designation of him as ''''evil'''' is going to have to take into account more of the psychoanalysis of the history. Intellectually and artistically speaking, Cao Wei was the most open of the Three Kingdoms (being the centre of Jian''''an-style literature and the neo-Daoist movement), and financially the most stable. Socially, the agricultural policies were designed to provide people injured displaced by war a chance to make their own lives viable again; He may have been ambitious and cunning, but I don''''t read him as a sadist.
这个人有许多缺点，尽管他没有在名义上篡夺皇位，但他还是与篡位者没什么两样。不过我认为，任何将他称为“邪恶”的说法，都必须更多地考虑到那个时代的价值判断。在学术上和艺术上，曹魏是三国之中最开放的(建安文学和新道家运动)国家，也是财政上最稳定的国家。在社会方面，曹魏所实施的一系列农业政策的目的是为因战争而流离失所的人民提供了一个重新过上安稳生活的机会;他也许野心勃勃，奸猾狡诈，但我不认为他是个暴君。
Cao Cao is both good and bad, he does what is needed to rule the land and if that requires him to be evil so be it. But it really depends on you, some Wei-ists think that his actions are good but some Shu-ists and Wu-ists thinks he is bad, so it really depends. Gamewise he is not that bad as protrayed in the novel but I still see him as a good guy overall.
曹操这个人，有好的一面，也有坏的一面，他所做的一切都是为了治理自己的国家。如果你站在魏国的角度，会觉得曹操的行为是好的，但如果你站在蜀国和吴国的角度，就会觉得曹操的行为是坏的。所以如何评价曹操，取决于你所站的立场。 在游戏中，他并不像小说中那么的坏。总的来说，我认为他是一个好人。
