Any historical event has motive and influence. If we evaluate people, we should look at motivation and evaluate events, and we should look at the effect. No matter how good the motivation is, the effect is too poor to be praised.

Generally speaking, the effect has two aspects. Both should be considered. Society is generally divided into many classes, and the influence on each class should be considered. Only in this way can we comprehensively sort out the positive and negative effects of the incident.

Whether the effect is more positive or negative must be combined with the social environment at that time, not brought into today's environment, or generally speaking. For example, China 60 years ago was good as long as it helped to concentrate resources on industrial development. After 70 years, as long as it helps to optimize resource allocation, it is good. Therefore, in these two different stages, the evaluation of the same policy may be completely different.

Finally, we must evaluate it from the perspective of long-term social development. All views that focus on the experiences of individuals or even a group of people are one-sided. All views focusing on the short-term effects of society are also one-sided. It is normal and reasonable that social development is at the expense of some people or a certain generation.