Self-Defense and Accusation from Prison: A Letter Written in Blood

To the Relevant Authorities:

---

My name is Chen Jingyuan (陈京元), a Chinese citizen (ID number: 510212197606300330). In September 2022, during a brief stay in Kunming, I was arrested by the Qianwei Police Station of Xishan District on absurd and nonsensical charges.In January 2023, I was indicted by the Xishan District People’s Procuratorate under Article 293 of the Criminal Law for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” [Refer to: The Indictment].In April of the same year, the Xishan District People’s Court, in a closed-door trial, sentenced me to one year and eight months in prison [Refer to: Criminal Judgment]. I immediately appealed the verdict, but my appeal [Refer to: A Notice of Appeal] was summarily rejected by the Kunming Intermediate People’s Court without a hearing, upholding the original sentence [Refer to: Criminal Ruling]. In July of the same year, I was sent to Kunming Prison to serve my sentence, where I remain to this day.

Looking back at the entire process, from my arrest by the police to the prosecution by the procuratorate and the trial and sentencing by the court, the relevant law enforcement personnel displayed arrogance, tyranny, and a bloody brutality. They completely disregarded Party discipline and national law, showing no awareness of their duty, as individuals supported by taxpayers, to protect the legitimate rights of citizens.They have acted with impunity, committing crimes against citizens, the nation, the people, and even the entire world and humanity. Clearly, this organized criminal behavior has far-reaching and detrimental consequences. If not promptly stopped and severely punished, allowing it to continue unchecked will likely lead to catastrophic results. After a period of hesitation and uncertainty, I have decided to summon the courage to accuse and report the relevant public security, procuratorial, and judicial personnel involved in this case.

I have noticed that despite my repeated, frank, and truthful explanations of my circumstances to the relevant law enforcement personnel, they still harbor many misunderstandings, and have even deliberately distorted facts to reach conclusions that are completely inconsistent with reality. Therefore, before further describing the illegal and criminal acts of these law enforcement personnel, allow me to first provide a brief introduction to my life.

---

I. Personal Resume

I was born in June 1976 in a remote rural village in Baoshan City, Yunnan Province.My father was a laid-off worker, and my mother was an ordinary farmer. Neither had much education, but they hoped I would study hard and become a knowledgeable and useful person. I did not disappoint their expectations and always studied diligently and earnestly. Finally, in June 2005, I successfully completed my studies and obtained a Ph.D.in Science.

My major was physics, with a focus on the research and exploration of nonlinear complex systems theory. This is a relatively new and emerging interdisciplinary field that primarily studies complex phenomena in the material world, human society, and even the realm of thought and consciousness, striving to discover universal characteristics and laws of motion. Due to the interdisciplinary nature of my field, I have always devoted almost all of my time and energy to learning and absorbing knowledge from various related fields.My studies have been very broad, encompassing mathematics, physics, chemistry, astronomy, biology, and even delving deeply into the humanities, history, philosophy, politics, economics, and finance. I firmly believe that only by truly achieving the step to “investigate the relationship between heaven and humanity, understand the changes of the past and present, and form one’s own unique perspective（究天人之际，通古今之变，成一家之言）” can one be considered to have achieved something in the academic world.

After completing my doctoral studies, I worked for over ten years at various research institutions and enterprises in China, holding positions such as researcher, system architect, and senior expert.I conducted a series of scientific theoretical research and specific product development projects, covering areas such as cutting-edge defense weapons (e.g., high-power lasers, high-power microwaves, plasmas), astrophysics and large astronomical instruments like adaptive optics systems, brain cognitive science and neural networks, artificial intelligence technology and related intelligent systems (e.g., robots, autonomous driving, smart home systems), and complex social and economic systems.My work has been very satisfactory, at least at a first-class level within China. I have published dozens of academic papers (as the first or sole author) in core journals both domestically and internationally, and successfully developed dozens of specific application systems.Some of my work has received awards of excellence, and I have been invited to give special lectures at well-known academic institutions both domestically and internationally to present my insights and occasional discoveries.

In 2019, I decided to give up my work elsewhere and return to my rural hometown to live with my elderly and ailing parents. Apart from occasionally helping my parents with simple agricultural and household chores, I maintained the habits and interests I had cultivated over the years, dedicating my remaining time to the study and research of professional theory. I am, after all, a professionally trained researcher; I am well-versed in the basic academic process. Moreover, for a theoretical worker, the simple and humble living and working conditions in my rural hometown do not significantly restrict me. Therefore, I have continued to achieve a great deal during this time, and I have truly felt the true value and meaning of life.

I describe my current lifestyle as that of an independent scholar. This is certainly not a self-aggrandizing term. “Scholar” indicates that I treat learning as a profession. I am a lifelong learner; learning is the essence of my life, and I will continue to learn as long as I live. “Independent” means that I do not belong to any political faction, social organization, or economic entity. I am simply an independent individual, choosing to study and research issues that interest me based on my personal stance and values. I believe that for a true scholar, this independence is necessary.Of course, this inevitably leads to family poverty and hardship in daily life, but I believe this is a price worth paying. For me, achieving spiritual freedom and independence through continuous learning is the ultimate goal and aspiration of my life.

---

II. Preliminary Observations and Understanding of the Judicial Process

During my travels across various places over the past twenty-plus years, I used social media ( primarily [Twitter] ) to view, like, retweet, and comment on some artistic works, articles, and videos that the Kunming police claimed (though, in reality, not all were) were “reactionary” and created by “overseas pro-democracy activists.” Because of this, the Public Security Bureau, Procuratorate, and Court of Xishan District, Kunming, arrested, prosecuted, and tried me for the alleged crime of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”.

However, a review of the relevant provisions of China’s Criminal Law reveals that the establishment of this crime requires several conditions: objectively, there must be acts of spreading rumors, and objectively, this must cause serious harm or severe disruption of social order; subjectively, the perpetrator must clearly know that the information being spread is deliberately fabricated rumors; and, of course, as criminal liability is a form of legal liability, establishing a causal relationship between the act and the damage is a crucial and essential element.

Yet, in the handling of this case, there was a clear lack of clear, concrete, and relevant objective factual evidence to support the establishment of the crime.The relevant law enforcement personnel were negligent in their duties, even lazy in investigating and verifying some basic and simple facts. They completely disregarded the specific and clear provisions of the relevant laws and regulations, failing to enforce the law strictly, normatively, fairly, and civilly. Everything was based on personal subjective will, resulting in a series of absurd and ridiculous judicial farces.

The public security investigators spent enormous manpower, material resources, and financial resources to investigate and repeatedly interrogate me, only to come up with the conclusion [Refer to it was found that:] that I “spread false statements on the information network and disrupted social order.” For someone like me, who has received a doctoral-level education, it is immediately obvious that using such a determination as evidence in this case is not only wrong but also meaningless. I can understand their mistakes. After all, after a few simple conversations, I had already concluded that these police officers had limited education and extremely low cognitive abilities, making misjudgments inevitable. After all, a higher level of cognitive ability requires arduous study and long-term effort to establish. It is almost impossible for these so-called “police officers,” who are unlearned, lazy, and idle, to develop correct cognition.

However, even so, the public security department was completely unable to provide evidence for the other two aspects of the crime: the subjective “knowledge that the information was a rumor” and the objective damage of “serious disorder.” I never even saw any evidence from the police that clearly showed the existence of the so-called “objective damage.” According to the legislative principles of China’s Criminal Law, the most important condition for constituting a crime should be the “social harm” (or infringement of legal interests) of the act. This is especially true for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble,” a notoriously “catch-all” crime, where the objective, concrete, and clear social harm caused by the subject’s behavior should be the most important, or even the only, consideration. Clearly, since the police completely lack clear evidence of “social harm,” it is far-fetched to consider my retweeting behavior illegal, let alone a criminal offense. As for other elements of the crime, such as whether it was a “rumor” or whether there was “knowledge,” which are even more difficult to determine, there is no need to even discuss them.

It is evident from the indictment that the prosecution also noticed the lack of evidence from the public security department in these two aspects. However, in order to proceed with the prosecution, they had to fabricate evidence out of thin air, “forcing the issue” by asserting that I knowingly knew the information was “false” when I retweeted and commented on it, and that this caused “serious disruption of public order.” [Refer to This Procuratorate believes that] The court also clearly saw the lack of effective evidence from the public security and the falsity of the prosecution’s charges. However, in order to cloak their completely wrong judgment in a seemingly “reasonable and legal” guise, they had to resort to various “underhanded” and low-level tactics. Regarding the prosecution’s false accusation of “serious disruption of public order,” the court continued to “play deaf and dumb,” demonstrating that they still dared not face the lack of evidence in this regard. As for the “knowledge” that it was a “rumor,” they racked their brains and used their imagination to make all kinds of ridiculous logical inferences, such as determining that I “have a high level of education and knowledge,” “should be able to distinguish right from wrong,” and “knew it was insulting and attacking the core of the national leadership and still retweeted it” [Refer to This court believes that]. In my opinion, these underhanded tricks are nothing more than a sinister attempt by the court to avoid the important and dwell on the trivial, to divert and confuse attention, and to deliberately muddy the waters when they lack effective evidence. They are completely unacceptable and, in fact, make them a laughingstock.

By simply comparing the different findings of the public security, procuratorate, and court regarding the evidence, it is clear that the relevant law enforcement personnel colluded and acted in concert, performing a perfect interpretation of slander and perversion of justice.

In the eyes of a scholar like me, who has received long-term, rigorous education (including in law) and professional research, the law enforcement actions of the relevant personnel are even more shocking. If examined according to the infamous “prosecutorial mindset” in psychology (this is a specific term, not an insult), it can be clearly concluded that every word and every action of all law enforcement officers in this case can be charged as illegal and criminal. Their illegal and criminal acts are too numerous to list, but I will briefly mention a few examples to illustrate their complete disregard for the basic principles of “fair and strict” law enforcement.

I pointed out in my appeal [Refer to: A Notice of Appeal] that the first-instance judgment violated many basic principles of Chinese law, such as the “principle of legality” and the “principle of subjective culpability” (i.e., subjective intent must be proven by concrete evidence, not presumed). The judgment clearly presumed that I was inherently guilty (“knowing,” “highly educated,” etc.), violating the legal principle of the presumption of innocence. Selective enforcement (for example, other than myself, other netizens who retweeted the same posts and articles, or even the original authors of the posts, were not arrested, charged, or convicted in this case) violated the basic legal principles of “equality before the law” and “same crime, same punishment.” I must point out here that the reason I appealed was to give the relevant law enforcement personnel a chance to redeem themselves, not, as they claimed, because I was “struggling desperately” due to “fear of the bloody crushing of the state’s violent apparatus.” In my appeal, I humbly acknowledged my limitations and shortcomings in a Christian “original sin” style, simply out of the virtues of scholarly humility and honesty, not, as the relevant law enforcement personnel believed, as an “admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment.” Even under the escalating bloody violence in Kunming Prison, I never admitted to the so-called “crime.” Pointing out their unfair “selective” enforcement was not, as the police claimed, to act as a “tainted witness” to “gain leniency” by accusing other netizens or the original authors of the posts. In fact, I am sincerely grateful and appreciative of the original authors of the posts for selflessly sharing their insights, and of other netizens for spreading their ideas.

By pointing out these principled errors, I was actually giving a well-intentioned reminder to the relevant law enforcement personnel of their absurd actions, hoping that they would make strict, standardized, fair, and civilized judgments and law enforcement that could withstand questioning and scrutiny, so as not to push themselves to a dead end in the future of “lifelong accountability.” However, it is clear that the relevant law enforcement personnel did not take this seriously, reflecting their complete trampling and contempt for the basic principles of the rule of law, as well as the basic national policies of comprehensively governing the country according to law and comprehensively and strictly governing the Party.

For example, it is easy to verify the simple fact that I am not a member of the Chinese Communist Party, and I have pointed this out many times. However, the relevant law enforcement officers deliberately and repeatedly distorted this point, and even repeatedly gave me so-called guidance and education on “Party Constitution and Party discipline” and “ideological morality.” Although I repeatedly pointed out that I do not agree with the ideology and values of the Communist Party, and that I have never joined the Chinese Communist Party or the Communist Youth League, the prosecutor still used their alleged violation of the Party Constitution and Party discipline as a basis for my prosecution and sentencing, making me, a usually gentle and timid scholar, unable to help but curse.

Although the court’s final judgment did not explicitly state this, but instead deliberately obfuscated the issue, a discerning person can still see at a glance that it was based on the Party Constitution and Party discipline and the Party’s ideology, rather than China’s Criminal Law, to convict me. This attempt to cover up the truth is truly laughable.

Another example: the police ransacked my home and carefully examined all my mobile phones, computers, and external hard drives. They examined all my bank accounts and every transaction record, as well as every post on all my social media accounts. After a large-scale examination of every post of mine, every document or picture in my computer and external hard drives, they still could not find any clear and effective evidence of my illegal and criminal activities. Finally, they seemed to find a few paintings of Xi Jinping, the current General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, in the cache of one of my old mobile phones. They were overjoyed and proudly announced that they had found “ironclad evidence” of my crime, and immediately carried out my formal arrest. I am curious. The pictures in the mobile phone cache are only evidence that I had linked to related web pages, not that I am the author of the pictures, or that I had browsed or forwarded the pictures, or other further dissemination. Moreover, the police could not find evidence of these pictures existing on the Internet. According to their “investigation” and “sorting,” the relevant accounts or groups where these pictures appeared had already been deleted or disbanded many years ago. The police actually used these few pictures as “ironclad evidence” of my “committing crimes on the run,” “deliberately” “spreading rumors on a large scale,” “picking quarrels and provoking trouble,” and causing “serious disruption of social order” in this “major criminal case.” It’s truly absurd and ridiculous.

During the so-called “court trial,” which was not held publicly, prosecutor Ge Bin’s responses to two questions from my lawyer were eye-opening and fully demonstrated the blatant contempt and trampling of the principle of “strictness” in law enforcement by this so-called “prosecutor.” The lawyer provided clear evidence that many of the posts I retweeted and were used by the police as “evidence of my crime” had been officially published on many domestic and foreign portal websites (such as Sina.com) and even on official Chinese Communist Party media (such as CCTV and *Guangming Daily*), and had been widely reproduced. This directly proved the falsity of the “evidence” that the police had gathered out of thin air and that prosecutor Ge Bin used as my “evidence.” However, prosecutor Ge Bin actually claimed that he “had not verified these posts” and “did not intend to verify them” because he “felt” that these posts were “rumors” and “should” be rumors. The lawyer asked that the current Chinese legal system has clear legal provisions for the interpretation and objective evaluation indicators of so-called “serious disorder,” and that none of my retweets met these conditions, so there was no legal basis for my trial and conviction. However, prosecutor Ge Bin replied that he believed that the relevant legal provisions were unreliable and that his “belief” should prevail. It’s truly laughable. It can be seen that these law enforcement officers did not enforce the law based on the principle of “taking objective facts as the basis and legal provisions as the criterion.” Everything was based on their own subjective will, fabricating various so-called “evidence of crime” out of thin air, disregarding the law, and arbitrarily acting as “legislators” rather than “law enforcement officers,” enacting legal provisions at any time and replacing the law with their words.

Why did the relevant law enforcement personnel in this case completely disregard basic facts and legal provisions, and no matter how hard they tried, they had to convict me of such an insulting crime of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” that could not withstand any questioning or scrutiny? One prosecutor revealed the secret in one sentence. He seemed to be speaking out of a conscience that had not yet been completely extinguished, and in order to shirk his own responsibility, he confessed to my lawyer with grievance that, judging from the so-called “evidence of crime” provided by the police, my “trivial matter” was “not even illegal, let alone a criminal offense.” But because there were “special instructions” from “higher-level” leaders to “definitely” make this case an “ironclad case” and “put him to death,” they had to do all sorts of bizarre and outrageous things against their conscience and resolutely send me to prison. This prosecutor actually confessed to the fact of judicial corruption by himself and his “higher-level leaders” without being asked, and was complacent and proud of it, which is truly unbelievable!

At this point, I finally realized that I had fallen into the clutches of the Kunming judicial gang, becoming a lamb to be slaughtered, arbitrarily manipulated and kneaded by them. Any resistance and struggle were futile. What I find particularly puzzling is that I, a “nobody” who has no relationship with them, could also encounter such a sudden disaster. As a native of Yunnan, I can only speculate that, after generations of gang leaders such as Gao Yan, Li Jiating, Bai Enpei, and Qin Guangrong, and generations of branch leaders in Kunming such as Yang Chongyong, Qiu He, Zhang Tianxin, and Gao Jinsong, under their “wise leadership” and “careful cultivation,” the Kunming judicial gang has not only grown into a towering tree with deep roots and lush foliage, but has even evolved into a ravenous beast that actively attacks and eats people.

---

III. Objective Facts of the “Crime”

Even from the brief observations above, it’s evident that this case is a fabricated miscarriage of justice deliberately manufactured by a malicious judicial gang. The so-called “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” is merely a convenient “catch-all crime” they use to slander, defame, and persecute me, and it doesn’t warrant further analysis. However, for a scholar like myself, conducting a deeper analysis is an interesting undertaking.

According to the fundamental principles of comprehensively advancing the rule of law in China’s new era, investigations by the public security organs, prosecutions by the procuratorate, and trials and judgments by the courts should all center on clarifying the specific objective facts (including both the criminal act itself and the facts of the harm caused by the act).This is the basis for further conviction and sentencing.

However, looking back at the entire handling of this case, the relevant law enforcement personnel made absolutely no effort or attempt to carry out any work in this regard. To better understand this case and the criminal behavior of the relevant law enforcement personnel, I will conduct a further analysis of this issue here.

1. Regarding the “Harmful Facts” and “Degree of Harm” of the “Crime”

Throughout the entire handling of this case, the “evidence of social harm” caused by my occasional reposting of articles online was completely ignored. Until the court’s verdict, I did not see any of the law enforcement personnel conduct any analysis or assessment of this. Such judicial professionalism and ethical standards are truly speechless. In fact, this is also completely understandable, because my reposting behavior did not cause any social harm. Naturally, the police could not and did not have the ability to fabricate evidence of this. The relevant law enforcement personnel therefore had to resort to directly “labeling” me. The Kunming judicial gang naively believed that simply labeling me could replace the arduous process of evidence collection, which is akin to drawing a cake to satisfy hunger (画饼充饥) and is utterly laughable.

The Xishan Public Security Department of Kunming labeling me as “disrupting social order” appears to be a determination of this necessary element of the crime, but in reality, objectively or scientifically speaking, such a determination is meaningless nonsense. In principle, any action of any human individual, or even just their existence, undoubtedly has an effect on the objective real world, or in other words, disturbs the real world. Modern physics even explicitly asserts that even a tiny “quantum” will affect the entire universe, which is the spooky “quantum entanglement” effect that even Einstein could not understand.

More specifically, social networks are typical complex systems with inherent disorder. The so-called small-world properties, scale-free properties, and long-tail effects that have been deeply studied in recent years are all manifestations of this disorder. Moreover, we have recognized that it is impossible to establish a truly ordered network system. For example, the well-known CAP theorem (which is also easily proven mathematically) shows that a distributed system cannot simultaneously achieve consistency, availability, and partition tolerance, and there is no deterministic algorithm that can achieve consensus or consistency in a general operating environment. Here, “consistency” and “consensus” are all measures of the orderliness of a system. These scientific conclusions seem profound, but in fact they are very simple and just illustrate that the real network is inherently disordered. Whether I repost or not will not change its disordered nature, and the “chaos” of the network order is not my responsibility.

On the other hand, the relevant provisions of China’s Criminal Law have clear quantitative standards for “serious chaos” of order caused by online dissemination, mainly based on the cumulative number of reposts. Analysis of all the posts presented as evidence by the police shows that they do not meet these conditions. Based on this, it can be judged that all my reposted articles cannot be used as valid evidence of my “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”.

Therefore, the accusation and verdict given by the Xishan District Procuratorate and the court that I “caused serious chaos in public order” is not only inconsistent with basic facts but also inconsistent with relevant legal provisions. It is completely a naked “slander” and “miscarriage of justice” against me.

To give a more easily understood example. Since my birth, I have been breathing fresh air and releasing carbon dioxide waste gas. The Kunming police claim that this behavior of mine will have an impact on the Earth’s atmosphere (depleting the Earth’s oxygen and even leading to the ozone hole). As a result, the procuratorate and the court determined that I was the originator of the deterioration of the Earth’s environment and the greenhouse effect and sentenced me to prison. This is not only absurd, it can be described as “the greatest joke in the world (滑天下之大稽).”

2. “Criminal Acts”: Spreading Rumors

Based on several police interrogations and my preliminary summary, the police have identified the alleged “rumors” primarily as the following four categories of online posts. In fact, when considering the specific content of these posts, it’s easy to see that they are clearly not “rumors.” (To date, all these posts still exist online and are publicly accessible, and I have never seen any official refutation or clarification.)

(1) The first category of reposts consists of artistic works

For example, a cartoon of the “Umbrella Girl” that was widely shared during the “Umbrella Movement” in Hong Kong. Of course, the aforementioned several images of artistic works (cartoons) about Xi Jinping, which I cannot confirm whether I have appreciated or forwarded, and for which the police cannot provide clear evidence of their existence online, can also be included in this category.

In reality, artistic works are creations by artists using various artistic techniques (exaggeration, symbolism, metaphor, etc.) to express personal thoughts, emotions, or understandings, and are entirely fictional. Clearly, it is unreasonable for the police to classify such works as rumors. For a scholar like me, who deeply loves traditional Chinese culture, this is even more unacceptable. Because unlike the purely rational way of thinking in the West, Chinese civilization is essentially an artistic and aesthetic culture with sensibility and symbolism. Our millennia-old Chinese characters and countless literary and artistic treasures are the best proof of this characteristic. President Xi Jinping once summarized our national spirit, and the most important part of it is the spirit of imagination and creation. The nonsensical determination by a few unlearned and incompetent ex-military police officers is undoubtedly a complete denial and subversion of Chinese civilization, and it is also a heavy blow to today’s literary and art workers.

Obviously, according to the logic of the Kunming police, the stories of “Pangu creating the world(盘古开天),” “Kuafu chasing the sun(夸父逐日),” “Jingwei filling the sea (精卫填海),” and “Chang’e flying to the moon (嫦娥奔月)” are clearly “rumors”; the poet Li Bai (李白)’s “white hair three thousand zhang (白发三千丈) “ is utter nonsense; and the national hero Yue Fei (岳飞)’s “aspiring to eat the flesh of the barbarians, laughing and drinking the blood of the Xiongnu（壮志饥餐胡虏肉，笑谈渴饮匈奴血）” is a blatant representation of a homicidal maniac and genocidal advocate. Qin Hui (秦桧) and others, using thirteen gold medals to recall Yue Fei and execute him, were not only great, glorious, and correct, but they are the true national heroes, not Yue Fei. Similarly, all cultural and artistic workers today will undoubtedly face imminent disaster. The so-called “cultural figures” like Sa Beining, who openly stage various time-travel farces on CCTV’s “Classics of China,” should all be brought to justice. As for the author and the entire production and performance team of works like “The Wandering Earth,” they are not only insulting Mother Earth and spreading false and terrifying statements and images, but they are also clearly seriously disrupting the normal social order and should be sentenced to life imprisonment.

(2) The 2nd category of reposts involves the expression of emotions

For example, I once reposted a picture of candlelight commemoration on a certain June 4th. I also reposted a picture related to the news of Professor Xu Zhangrun, a jurist at Tsinghua University, being released and returning home. These types of posts are basically expressions of the subjective emotions of netizens, and I was merely reposting them. I did not express my own views, attitudes, or emotions, nor did I like or comment on them.

Of course, I have always been introverted and inarticulate, and I rarely comment or reply to content I am interested in, but such posts are very few. The police searched all my social media and various accounts for nearly 20 years, and they only found a few comments or replies from me. For example, on my (long-abandoned) WeChat account, I once lamented “It seems Huawei will be beaten back to its original form” after reading an article about the US ban on high-end chips for Huawei (a private account, inaccessible to outsiders, visible only to a dozen classmates, friends, and relatives). [WeChat image]

More than ten years ago, I posted a simple comment, seemingly on QQ Weibo (now inaccessible, only visible in “My Sayings” in my QQ): “Historically, authoritarian countries often stir up nationalist sentiment when faced with numerous domestic contradictions that they are unable to resolve, shifting the attention of the domestic population to foreign conflicts, sometimes even leading to war. This method has been successfully applied, such as by the famous Iron Chancellor Bismarck.” [QQ image]

I once angrily commented under a report that seemed to be about some high-ranking CCP officials massively embezzling state or private enterprises in the name of anti-corruption: “The so-called anti-corruption is just to enrich the CCP’s powerful and privileged and to provide them with a blood transfusion, and it has little to do with us ordinary people” (My this repost still has 0 retweets and has not received any forwarding). Reposting these kinds of posts was a spur-of-the-moment action, purely an expression of my personal subjective will, and did not require objectivity.

I don’t know how these few posts were determined to be “rumors” by the police，and how these few posts can cause “serious chaos in public order” Are they all “heartless and inhumane” beasts who don’t understand that there is a subjective psychological experience called “emotion” or “feeling” in every normal human being? Is having such subjective psychological experiences a crime? This is undoubtedly even more absurd than the case described by Freud a hundred years ago in “The Interpretation of Dreams,” where someone was sentenced to death for killing the king in a dream. If having certain subjective emotional experiences is a crime, I estimate that all normal Chinese people would be unable to escape arrest and trial by the Kunming police and courts.

(3) The 3rd category is about rational understanding of the real-world.

The third category of my so-called “criminal evidence,” which the police have extensively collected, consists of articles describing, summarizing, analyzing, or commenting on current affairs, news, history, figures, or academic theories, ideologies, and other fields by various institutions, think tanks, experts, scholars, social celebrities, and even ordinary individuals. As a scholar, especially one engaged in interdisciplinary research, understanding, tracking, learning, referencing, and evaluating different viewpoints and debates in various fields is an important basic research method and process. Therefore, these types of posts are of great interest to me, and I often follow, repost, or comment on them.

For example, the widely discussed online post “An Objective Evaluation of Xi Jinping”, some articles by Professor Xu Zhangrun, former US President Trump’s speech “Criticizing Communism”, speeches by other politicians, such as former US Secretary of State Pompeo speech on US-China relations, various reports and State of the Union addresses related to China issued by the US government, etc.

These posts are basically not my original creations; I simply reposted and followed them after seeing them, with the purpose of saving them to my account for further research and analysis when I have time. Clearly, this type of online post is the main “ironclad evidence” extracted by the Kunming police for my “committing crimes everywhere,” “picking quarrels and provoking trouble,” and “spreading rumors.” In fact, exaggerating my occasional, sporadic reposts, with a number of followers and total retweets not exceeding one hundred, as “massively spreading false information online” is merely a laughable performance of their mystification. In fact, in their view, simply paying attention to and understanding these topics is a crime. Because my lawyer told me that the playback record in my Google (or YouTube) account showed that I had only watched (but never reposted or commented on) such videos, and this was also one of the pieces of so-called “ironclad evidence” of my “crime” extracted by the police.

I am puzzled by the logic of the Kunming police classifying these posts as “rumors” and learning and discussing related content as criminal offenses. In my opinion, paying attention to, understanding, analyzing, discussing, and evaluating these issues is a basic right of a citizen, and it should also be the responsibility or obligation of a citizen. It is clear that these posts, even the State of the Union reports officially released by US government departments, contain many biases or unfair comments. However, at the same time, these posts also contain many insights that are worth paying attention to, collecting, reposting, commenting on, analyzing, and absorbing.

I think that the few ex-military police officers at the Qianwei Police Station, who have not received much basic education and civilization cultivation and literacy, may have seen some errors or biases in these posts, thus giving them the “handle” to rant and classify these posts as “rumors.” If so, then I think they have actually made another, more fatal mistake, that is, the edifice of civilization built by mankind to date will be denied and subverted by them. Because human rational thinking has essential flaws, all the achievements of human civilization to date, from religion, philosophy to science, including modern physics such as relativity and quantum theory, which are rigorously tested and widely used modern theoretical systems, are not perfect, and they all have clear and irreparable essential flaws and even errors.

(4) The 4th category are descriptions of historical or current realities

Some of the third category of posts are purely historical materials and descriptions of current realities; these are listed separately here as the fourth category. For example, the history of the editing and revision of “Selected Works of Mao Zedong”, a retired cadre’s pay slip reflecting the current situation of China’s pensions, Cao Changqing’s article “I Agree with Comrade Xiaoping’s Retirement” published in the “Shenzhen Youth Daily”, a Sina.com article about the history of military exchanges and cooperation between China and Ukraine, etc.

These posts have some reference value. For example, the pay slip can be used to understand the current situation of China’s economic structure and wage income distribution; the revision history of “Selected Works of Mao Zedong” can be used to deeply understand the evolution of Mao Zedong Thought and further deeply comprehend Mao Zedong Thought, etc., all of which are very beneficial and worth paying attention to.

Obviously, this type of post does not need to involve personal subjective understanding or emotions and other individual psychology, and purely belongs to the description of objective facts. Therefore, in principle, under appropriate conditions and with sufficient resources, these posts can be verified to determine whether they are “rumors.” Of course, I also do not doubt that there may indeed be “rumors” “maliciously concocted” by “troublemakers” in this fourth category of posts, as the Kunming police said.

But even if I had reposted these “rumors,” I would only be a “victim” who was deceived, not a “criminal” who should bear criminal responsibility. The Kunming police have completely mistaken the “criminal subject” and the “infringed object.” In this case, who is the criminal subject? The original creator who deliberately fabricated these posts, and the Kunming police must also bear corresponding legal responsibility. Because the public officials of the Kunming police, as people who are unable to create any material wealth and only live on taxpayers’ money, assume the role of protectors of taxpayers’ legitimate rights and interests, they have the responsibility to assume the responsibility of network maintainers in what they claim to be “illegal places outside the law,” and they have obviously spent a huge amount of people’s hard-earned money, so they should naturally have the conditions and ability to find and clarify “online rumors” and give the vast number of netizens and taxpayers a clean and beautiful online living environment. The Internet is full of various unclarified “rumors” that mislead netizens, which is solid evidence of the Kunming police’s dereliction of duty and malfeasance. Now they have turned around and put the hat of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” on me, an innocent victim, and sentenced me to prison. What a ridiculous farce of pointing at a deer and calling it a horse (指鹿为马), and of a thief crying “stop thief” (贼喊捉贼)!

(5) All of the four categories of reposts are not my “knowing rumors”

The above categories of posts cover all the “criminal evidence” extracted by the police for my “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.” In fact, they respectively describe the creation and appreciation of artistic works, the expression of personal subjective emotions, rational understanding, and the description of objective reality, which are basically a relatively complete classification of the content of human spiritual life. According to simple common sense, it can be judged that the police’s determination that I “disseminated false information” is purely a misjudgment. The first three categories obviously do not belong to the category where a judgment of whether it is a “rumor” can be made. Only the fourth category may fall into different categories of “rumors” or “non-rumors”; but the fourth category is not within the scope of my “knowing,” because I basically do not have the conditions and resources to make a corresponding confirmation. In fact, I also have no obligation to spend a lot of time and energy to carefully examine and clarify whether they are “rumors.” This should obviously be the essential work of the police, and I have no right or obligation to do it for them!

The Kunming police not only failed to provide clear and effective evidence that I had “spread rumors” and that I had caused “serious disruption” to social order, but they also failed to provide any clear evidence that I “knew” that the posts were rumors. However, prosecutor Ge Bin of the Xishan District Procuratorate, without the police providing any evidence of “knowing it was a rumor,” directly and arbitrarily fabricated the accusation that I “knew it was a rumor,” and maliciously slandered and defamed me.

“Judge” Pu Huijun of the Xishan District Court clearly saw that the prosecution’s false accusation was not supported by any valid evidence. However, in order to meet the goal of the judicial gang’s behind-the-scenes mastermind to “put me to death,” he had to rack his brains and play many “logical reasoning” in the judgment, making the judgment appear to be reasonable and legal. However, these little tricks of theirs, in the eyes of a scholar like me who has been immersed in logical reasoning and the way of words for decades, are nothing but “lifting a stone to drop it on their own feet,” and instead expose their own ugly faces clearly. Below, I will further analyze the hilarious performance of “Judge” Pu Huijun.

3. The Court’s hilarious performance

As repeatedly pointed out earlier, the evidence regarding causing “serious social disorder” was completely unattainable by the police, because it simply didn’t exist. Therefore, the prosecution could only resort to directly labeling me, while the court pretended to be deaf and dumb, avoiding the issue. Even the court seemed dissatisfied with the prosecution’s direct labeling approach regarding the false accusation of “knowingly spreading rumors.” Consequently, they presumptuously added a series of seemingly reasonable l**ogical inferences**.

For example, the verdict states that I “possess a high level of education and knowledge,” “should have the ability to distinguish right from wrong,” and “forwarded pictures and articles that [I] knew were insulting and attacking the core leadership of the country and our current system, and the forwarded content, after being sorted, was all false information.”

It is clear that Judge Pu [Pu Huijun, the presiding judge] also realized that the Kunming police lacked valid evidence, and he was unable to provide a reasonable and legal explanation for my “knowingly spreading rumors.” Thus, he made a feint, intending to change his tactic. He first emphasized that I “knew” the content was “attacking and insulting the core leadership and our current political system,” and then further stated that these “attacks and insults” were “false information.” He seemingly believed this could prove that I “knowingly spread rumors,” thus trapping me in the “pocket crime” of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.”

On the surface, the verdict appears righteous, but a simple examination reveals that the concepts are unclear, the language is vague, the logic is nonsensical, and the content is not only fabricated but also completely incompatible with the country’s legal principles and various guidelines and policies.

I will briefly point out two issues here.

First, Judge Pu acknowledges that I “possess a high level of education and knowledge and can distinguish right from wrong.” This seems to be used as evidence of my “deliberate offense” to provide logical support for Prosecutor Ge Bin’s unfounded “labeling” accusation, which lacked police evidence. This was to make Prosecutor Ge Bin’s false accusation appear less abrupt and blatant. However, I have repeatedly used my “knowledge and level” and “ability to distinguish right from wrong” to explain to Judge Pu that “deliberately spreading rumors” was completely impossible, because not a single post I forwarded could be categorized as “knowingly” and “rumors.”

In fact, the “evidence” or “inference” that Judge Pu “presumptuously” provided is completely meaningless and instead puts himself in a self-contradictory state. Obviously, he does not actually acknowledge my “high level of education and knowledge” and my “ability to distinguish right from wrong.” Otherwise, I would not be detained in Kunming Prison. I remember that the “proof by contradiction” method often used in middle school mathematics textbooks uses this “law of contradiction” to negate a proposition. Therefore, Judge Pu’s logical thinking ability has clearly not reached the level of a middle school student.

Actually, the fact is also very simple.Judge Pu Huijun and I have never met, and he is completely unaware of and uncertain about my knowledge and ability status. I guess that Judge Pu Huijun, due to his lack of learning and incompetence, certainly doesn’t understand quantum theory. In quantum theory, this is called the “Schrödinger’s cat” state, an uncertain state. Legal judgments cannot be based on “uncertainty.” There is the principle of “presumption of innocence” and “when in doubt, favor the accused.” Seeing Judge Pu Huijun pretending to be familiar with me and presumptuously and confidently fabricating evidence for Prosecutor Ge Bin’s false accusation, it really disgusts me.

Second, it violates basic common sense, national legal principles, and various specific legal provisions. For example, China’s criminal law has never stipulated any privileged clauses for the “core leadership,” because that would violate the most basic principle of fairness in law. Whether or not the “core” is “insulted” is a personal subjective emotional experience of the “core” himself. It should be judged by the “core” himself and he should decide whether to sue. This is obviously not something that a low-level person like Judge Pu can arbitrarily speculate, act on behalf of, accuse, and arbitrarily judge. Judge Pu’s mentality of “the emperor is not anxious, but the eunuch is (皇帝不急太监急)” is truly baffling.

Knowing that something is an “attack and insult” does not necessarily mean knowing that it is a “rumor.” Moreover, Judge Pu’s “sorting” and determination that it is a rumor is not evidence that “I” “knew” it was a rumor. The police were clearly unable to provide direct evidence of “attacks and insults,” and the prosecution’s indictment did not dare to accuse me of this. However, Judge Pu Huijun, as the judge, presumptuously accused me of “insulting the core,” which is clearly a contrived attempt to “kill the heart.”

“Attacking and insulting” posts are not necessarily rumors. They are very likely to be legitimate criticisms and suggestions made by citizens exposing inappropriate words and deeds of the core leadership and exercising their “right to supervision” or “right to participate in and discuss politics.” If it is criticism and suggestions on the inappropriate words and deeds of the core, this is obviously a “great achievement” that benefits the country and the people, not any “illegal and criminal” behavior.

There is a huge gap among these, and wanting to bridge it is tantamount to “carrying Mount Tai to cross the North Sea (挟泰山以超北海),” “carrying 200 jin of wheat for 10 li of mountain road without switching shoulders,” or “having the level of an elementary school student but being proficient in classic masterpieces from all over the world.” Obviously, there are countless necessary links that need to be further carefully considered, and only by verifying all of them can the case be handled well. This is not only the basic professional ethics and quality that a judge should possess, but also a self-preservation measure to remain invincible in the inevitable “lifetime accountability” in the future.

Unfortunately, it is clear that Judge Pu Huijun lacks basic professional ethics, legal literacy, and logical thinking ability. Everything is carried out according to his subjective will, based on imagination and fabrication. I estimate that Judge Pu cannot understand that modern law can evolve into a rigorous system similar to mathematics (formal language) or computer programming language (regular language). Its application or law enforcement process does not require imagination and fabrication at all, but only factual evidence and rigorous logical deduction. Unfounded imagination will only make Judge Pu Huijun sink deeper into the quagmire of “spreading rumors and slander.”

I think that although Judge Pu did not read much and did not receive a good school education, his parents should have at least taught him to be an honest person and not to lie when he was a child. Because even a small lie often requires more and bigger lies to cover up, and eventually it will inevitably be exposed, and one’s reputation will be ruined. If even this education and upbringing are lacking, I can only feel regret and pity for Judge Pu.

As the saying goes, “Words are the voice of the heart (言为心声), and writing reflects the person (文如其人).” From this, one can easily see the unlearned and despicable nature of Pu Huijun and his ilk. I had no intention of further analyzing Judge Pu’s various low-level errors, but I noticed that Judge Pu Huijun attempted to further politicize the issue (I think this seems to show the “cunning” of the Kunming police and the prosecution, and also shows the “stupidity” of Judge Pu), and attempted to impose obvious political persecution on me, an independent scholar who has always been uninterested in politics, devoted to scientific research, and has long since withdrawn from public office. Below, I will specifically select two politically charged posts for further analysis.

Is the painting of “Xi Jinping kneeling to Trump,” which the police also cannot trace the origin of but blame on me, an “attack and insult” to the “core” Xi Jinping? Seeing that many law enforcement officers in this case claim that this painting is the “ironclad evidence” of my “major criminal case,” which is said to have attracted great attention from the top, and used as an “imperial sword” to put me to death, jumping up and down like a clown, I find it really ridiculous. Not to mention that the police cannot provide valid proof that I ever forwarded this painting, and I myself cannot be sure that I ever forwarded it. After all, too much time has passed, and even the internet has no memory of it, let alone a mere mortal like me. In fact, even if I did forward it, it could not be used as valid evidence of my “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.”

As a work of art, its appreciation, like its creation, is a very subjective aesthetic activity, completely lacking the scientific judgment of right and wrong, true and false. There is a special term in aesthetics or hermeneutics, “hermeneutic circle,” which is a summary of this phenomenon. For this cartoon, most people would think that it is a relatively objective and true representation of the US-China trade war situation, and it also vividly shows China’s humiliation and forbearance and the arrogance and hegemony of the United States. It is a good cartoon. Although most people would only regard Xi and Trump in the cartoon as symbolic figures of China and the United States, even from a personal perspective, it cannot be considered an “attack” and “insult” to Xi’s “core.”

After all, “bearing humiliation (忍辱负重),” “hiding one’s light and biding one’s time (韬光养晦),” and “I will have no self (我将无我)” have always been the political consciousness advocated by China’s “core leadership.” They are obviously not something that ordinary people like Judge Pu, who are eagerly seeking personal honor, disgrace, wealth, and nobility, can arbitrarily speculate on. Therefore, the artistic conception of this work may be exactly what the core Xi pursues and appreciates. In fact, many netizens believe that the posture of the core Xi in the picture can better show the traditional Chinese virtues: “The modest gentleman uses humility to cultivate himself (谦谦君子，卑以自牧),” and “He who bears the disgrace of the country is the lord of the society, and he who bears the misfortune of the country is the king of the world (受国之垢是为社稷之主，承国不祥方为天下之王).” Many netizens even compare this work with the “Crucifixion of Jesus.” Has Christianity been “insulting” their leader for thousands of years?

I think that in the eyes of ordinary modern educated people, if the postures of Trump and Xi in the picture are reversed, this should be an “attack and insult” to the core Xi. Is a painting of Trump “kneeling to see” Xi Jinping and shouting “Long live, long live, long live the emperor” three times considered “respect” for the core Xi? Judge Pu’s aesthetic taste is really ridiculous. I remember that one of the reasons why the Great Qing Empire of China eventually perished was because of this aesthetic taste.

I can understand that Judge Pu “sorted” this cartoon as an “insult” to the core Xi. After all, personal aesthetic feelings are originally subjective and different, and aesthetic ability is an ability even more advanced than logical thinking ability, requiring innate understanding and also needing to be constantly honed and sublimated to reach a higher level. Therefore, only famous scholars like Wang Guowei (王国维) have the ability to understand the “three realms (三重境界)” of achieving great learning and great careers from “the sorrows and grievances of men and women in the alleys of extreme style (极尽风窑里巷之男女哀怨).” Conversely, for a cow, whether you play “High Mountains and Flowing Water (高山流水)” or “Spring Snow (阳春白雪)” for it, the cow will definitely be indifferent, and may even think that it is a deliberate “provocation” and “insult” to it and fly into a rage and knock the performer to the ground.

Can Trump’s Speech on Criticizing Communism be directly “sorted” as an “attack and insult” to China’s current system? Does Judge Pu think that Trump did not give this speech, or that the content of Trump’s speech was tampered with by the poster and is completely different from what is presented in the video? Trump’s speech is well-known, and a little research can determine its authenticity. Obviously, Judge Pu not only has not understood the content of this speech, but also has no understanding of China’s current system, and has even less knowledge of the common sense of human thought and philosophy. I even suspect that Judge Pu Huijun’s head is filled with “water” or even “shit.”

The history of human thought is a battlefield of mutual slaughter, and its history is buried with countless bones. However, it is in this life-and-death struggle that various splendid flowers of human thought bloom. Originating even from the ancient Hebrew and Greek traditions (such as Plato, etc.), through the Enlightenment, liberalism, Romanticism, and Sturm und Drang movements of Rousseau, Locke, Saint-Simon, Voltaire, etc., and finally achieving a complete form in Marx, communism has been controversial since its birth. For hundreds of years, criticisms of communism have been numerous and countless.

Today, such debates have long entered middle school textbooks and are taught to students as basic common sense. Among the most famous are, for example, the criticism of the falsifiability of Marxism by the master of logical positivism, Karl Popper. More than a hundred years ago, the criticism of Keynes, the father of macroeconomics, by Nobel Prize winner and Austrian school economist Hayek and others was essentially a similar criticism, and so on.

Similarly, in Chinese history, the debate on “whether it is surnamed socialist or capitalist” was also in full swing in the early days of reform and opening up decades ago. Moreover, in fact, the similar “dispute between Confucianism and Taoism” has also been fighting with each other for thousands of years and has not stopped and will continue forever. The history of civilization in ancient and modern China and foreign countries was originally driven and developed by these contradictory and opposing forces. They are all indispensable components of the system, and there is no doubt that such debates and mutual criticism are the essence of human civilization and its core. A few years ago, behavioral economist Robert Shiller and Eugene Fama, the founder of the completely opposite efficient market theory, jointly won the Nobel Prize. Similarly, this is the echo and resonance of such debates, reflecting the academic community’s high recognition of the value of such debates.

In my opinion, Trump’s speech is just a performance of a professional politician trying to be pretentious and elegant. Compared with the storms in academic research and the history of human civilization and thought, although it is not worth mentioning, it still has some ideological enlightenment and value. How can I be labeled with big hats such as “attacking and insulting the core leadership and China’s current system” just because I forwarded such a video of “criticizing communism”? Should Judge Pu also put the same hats on all scholars of politics, economics, philosophy, and other humanities, and even middle school students?

Although I have no hope for the “sorting” ability of Pu Huijun and his fellows, I remember that until the end of the trial, they had not “sorted” out the simple fact of whether I was a member of the Communist Party. But I was impressed by Judge Pu’s courage and creativity when I saw that he brazenly “sorted” such commonplace debates, which have even entered middle school textbooks, as “rumors” in the judgment. My “admiration” for Judge Pu is truly like a surging river, endless.

But after calming down and thinking about it carefully, I am more suspicious that Judge Pu’s “courage” and “creativity” should be called “arrogance” and “ignorance.” In psychology, Judge Pu’s symptom is called the “Dunning-Kruger effect” or “Anton-Babinski syndrome.” This is a disease; a mental illness caused by a lack of a key “nutrient” called “humility” in the brain.

As I pointed out earlier, the so-called “judges” (actually legal illiterates) like Pu Huijun “sort” truth, goodness, and beauty into “rumors” and “false information,” which is tantamount to Zhao Gao’s “calling a stag a horse” and will inevitably lead to the complete denial and subversion of human civilization.

Here, I will just say a few words about political civilization. There is no doubt that any party and state government that represents the advanced culture and the direction of progress will certainly not denounce these essences of civilization as “rumors” and ban them, but will instead digest and absorb them as nourishment and energy and condense them in their own blood and thoughts as the foundation and driving force for further development.

In fact, the socialist ideology with Chinese characteristics that has gradually formed since China’s reform and opening up is no longer the communism criticized by Trump, but a hybrid system that integrates various capitalist elements. For example, the introduction of market mechanisms into the economic system and the gradual increase of its role from basic to decisive allocation of resources; in recent years, the introduction of comprehensive “rule of law” especially “rule by constitution,” and the so-called “checks and balances of decision-making, execution, and supervision” obviously draws on the effective “constitutional democracy” and “separation of powers” of the capitalist world; and the “one country, two systems” policy formulated to achieve the great cause of national reunification is an affirmation of the effectiveness of capitalist operation; and so on. Therefore, regarding such debates as “rumors” is not only absurd and ridiculous, but also decadent and reactionary.

In short, stripping away the false guise of the seemingly righteous accusations and judgments of the Kunming judicial gang, once we delve into the specific content of the posts, the dirty and ugly true face of the judicial gang is clearly exposed. What makes me speechless is that in order to discredit a small and insignificant person like me, the judicial gang did not hesitate to deny the various achievements of human civilization and shake the foundation for further human development. In fact, their actions are not only a complete denial and subversion of China’s current party and state policies, but also the best proof of their anti-civilization, anti-humanity, and anti-social gang nature.

---

IV. Evaluation of My Subjective State: “Knowing” and “Intentional”

During the handling of this case, the relevant law enforcement personnel made various subjective assumptions about my knowledge and abilities in order to provide “legitimate” reasons and excuses for their defamation and persecution of me. Watching a group of so-called “police officers,” “prosecutors,” and “judges” — who seemingly “came from the military ranks” and are “illiterate”—giving academic guidance and ideological education to a senior intellectual who graduated with a doctorate over twenty years ago and has read tens of thousands of books, I deeply felt the helplessness of intellectuals being criticized by the Red Guards during the ten years of the Cultural Revolution. I could only repeat to them again and again, in my already hoarse voice, that my knowledge and abilities are limited, and I do not possess the knowledge and capabilities they attributed to me. I had absolutely no idea that the posts I forwarded were “rumors.” My more than twenty years of arduous study and subsequent twenty years of specialized research have not cultivated in me the so-called “ability to distinguish right from wrong” that they possess. Nor have I ever established the kind of great achievement of “one word makes the princes fear, and living peacefully makes the world tranquil (一言而诸侯惧，安居则天下息).” This kind of ability and achievement in political maneuvering (纵横捭阖) what I dream of, but I have self-awareness, and I clearly do not possess it.

On the other hand, I believe that as a holder of a doctoral degree, with many years of research experience and achievements in related fields, I am willing to express some personal, shallow opinions on related fields. I have repeatedly expressed to the relevant law enforcement personnel, and even in court at the end, my request to defend myself, but I was basically rudely reprimanded: “Shut up, just answer what you’re asked!” and “Just answer yes or no!”

Thinking back to that perfunctory excuse for a “hearing,” the judge raised the topic of my profession (one of only two questions asked of me during the trial, the other being whether I was a member of the Communist Party of China). While I was merely trying to clarify the question itself, the judge harshly interrupted me as soon as I spoke, denying me any opportunity. It was obvious at that moment that they dismissed the very “high level of education and knowledge” and the ability “to distinguish right from wrong” that the verdict claimed I possessed.

This embarrassing situation is truly speechless. In this section, I will explain my overall ignorance and incompetence, and I will also offer some personal, shallow opinions on related issues within the scope of my limited cognitive abilities.

1. My “Unknown Realm” is Boundless

I recall how confident I was when I graduated from university and entered the research institute as a graduate student: I knew everything from astronomy to geography, spanning ancient and modern times, connecting China and foreign countries. However, my advisor coldly told me, “Actually, you don’t know anything yet!”

With one sentence, I was awakened from my self-indulgence, and I began a journey of desperate learning. Gradually, I finally realized the complex nature of the world. I know that humanity currently cannot even understand the simplest problems (such as two-body quantum entanglement, three-body chaotic motion, etc.), let alone other things. Similarly, I fundamentally understand the limits of human reason: from Gödel’s theorem, I understood the bankruptcy of basic logic and formalism and other theoretical methods; while the empiricism or intuitionism from Locke to Berkeley to Hume was recognized as absurd and ridiculous even earlier. And so far, humanity basically has only these two ways of understanding. Thus, facing a complex world, achieving complete understanding is, in principle, impossible.

I am basically a skeptic now. I don’t think I have any certain knowledge in my mind, and I maintain a skeptical or critical attitude towards all knowledge in the human cognitive field. Therefore, the various knowledge and abilities that the relevant law enforcement personnel determined I “knew” are completely inconsistent with my cognitive structure.

For example, I completely disagree with the judgment that I “knew they were rumors.” Basically, I think the posts or articles that are worth my attention and forwarding are all high-quality articles that I find extremely valuable for collection and worthy of further research and discussion. Even if I saw these posts now, I would not hesitate to collect, forward, or comment on them. Of course, due to the limitations of individual human cognitive abilities, shortcomings or even errors in the posts are inevitable, but to directly “sort” these posts as “rumors” is excessive. This approach is a real crime, and a heinous one at that, a crime against the future and destiny of all humanity.

2. My Professional Field is Narrow but Unfathomable

Of course, I still have great expectations for the scientific method. Although, in principle, this method cannot obtain something that can be called “ultimate truth,” under certain conditions, this method can often obtain many deterministic and interesting conclusions, such as telling us what is possible and what is impossible, such as the aforementioned CAP theorem, Gödel’s theorem, and similarly Arrow’s impossibility theorem, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, and so on. Therefore, I still spend most of my energy on scientific research. Among them, the propagation effect in complex systems is a field I have specifically studied [Atmospheric Turbulence Intermittency and Its Effect on Light Wave Propagation], and I have some knowledge of it. Here, I will briefly introduce some concepts and offer some personal, shallow opinions on this case.

I am a researcher in physics, and I like to consider problems from a physics perspective. Essentially, physics is the science that studies the process and laws of the motion and change of matter or energy, and it does not pay much attention to the process of information dissemination. However, information is always attached to matter and energy and cannot exist independently. Therefore, information dissemination is actually a process of matter and energy transmission, and studying the process of information dissemination and its effects is essentially still a physics problem.

When the propagation process in a complex system causes some drastic or observable effect, the self-organized criticality (SOC) and its avalanche dynamics mechanism introduced by physicists Bak, Tang, etc. are often used for analysis. For example, this set of methods is widely used to study the analysis of complex problems such as financial market stock market crashes, large-scale outbreaks of influenza viruses, and large-scale mass incidents (such as the “Black Lives Matter” movement in the United States).

Based on my years of research experience in this field, it is easy to judge that my retweeting behavior could not possibly trigger the dynamic avalanche mechanism of a complex system, causing the so-called “serious disorder of order.” On the contrary, the information about the Kunming judicial gang’s various rumors, defamation, political framing, and persecution of me, deliberately creating false and unjust cases, once spread on the network (Internet or social networks, national government networks, academic exchange networks, etc.), may cause coupling, correlation, and resonance excitation at various scales of the system (from individuals to society, the country, and even the world), which is very likely to cause the avalanche dynamics mechanism of self-organized criticality in complex systems, leading to catastrophic consequences.

At present, although I am as calm and peaceful as ever, I occasionally feel apprehensive and trembling. I sigh for the “fearlessness of the ignorant” of the Kunming judicial gang; I worry that “I did not kill Boren, but Boren died because of me (我不杀伯仁，伯仁却因我而死)”; I am even more afraid that “under a collapsed nest, how can there be unbroken eggs?”

3. Does my professional credentials as a scholar and career trajectory per se constitute conclusive evidence of criminal conduct under the law?

Academic research, as the cornerstone of human knowledge advancement, bears the mission of exploring truth and promoting innovation. Theoretically, any single perspective or theory inevitably has limitations (this is precisely what Gödel’s theorem determines). The debate between the Copenhagen School and Einstein in the early twentieth century, which lasted for more than thirty years, was superficially a conflict of physical concepts, but in reality, it was a cognitive leap produced by the collision of multiple ways of thinking. Bohr regarded his opponent’s questioning as a whetstone for improving his theory, and this open attitude eventually led to the quantum revolution that changed the course of human civilization. Similarly, if disciplines such as philosophy, economics, and sociology are limited to only one theory (such as materialism or liberalism), they will inevitably ignore the rationality of other schools of thought, leading to one-sidedness or bias. For example, for Nozick and Rawls, Gödel’s theorem revealed their fate: Rawls could not “cover everything,” and Nozick could not be “self-consistent.” Their confrontation is not only the pinnacle of political philosophy, but also the epitome of the eternal tension in the history of thought.

Facing the complex and ever-changing real world, academic research must adhere to the principles of openness, diversity, and rational discussion. Only by broadly integrating the ideas and viewpoints of different cultures and disciplines, and absorbing various schools of thought with a broad and inclusive attitude, can a more complete and profound knowledge system be constructed. This concept is not only the essential requirement of the scientific spirit, but also the necessary path to address global challenges and promote social development.

As an individual researcher in the field of interdisciplinary complexity, understanding, tracking, learning, digesting, criticizing, and absorbing the viewpoints of various schools of thought is precisely the main work I have been diligently carrying out for many years. More than twenty years ago, because I needed to complete the courses and dissertation for my doctoral degree, I had to repeatedly wander around the major libraries in Beijing, studying and understanding the attacks and accusations of Karl Popper and Hayek against Marxists. Similarly, today, I am still struggling with intuition, logic, and formalism, logic, connection, and behaviorism, and structure, construction, and deconstruction, etc., and I am infatuated and unable to extricate myself.

According to the logic presented in the court verdict, it appears that the fundamental reason for this sudden calamity that has befallen me is my own ‘high level of education and knowledge,’ along with my capacity to ‘distinguish right from wrong.’ Maybe, in the view of this judicial mafia, simply being a scholar constitutes ironclad proof that I ‘deliberately’ engaged in ‘picking quarrels and provoking trouble’.

However, I doubt very much whether the Kunming judicial gang has the courage and guts to put the hat of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” on all the scientists and scholars on Chinese soil, send them to court and prison, and accept the bloody crushing of the state’s violent machinery. Or, dare to risk the condemnation of the world (冒天下之大不韪), and launch the “Cultural Revolution” again, to beat intellectuals back to their original state of “stinking ninth category?”

---

V. Accusations and Reports

In summary, the accusations and sentencing against me by the Kunming judicial mafia, with Ge Bin, Pu Huijun, Li Xiangyun, and others as their henchmen and thugs, have no support from any objective, concrete evidence of criminal activity, nor do they comply with relevant legal provisions. This is a completely fabricated, unjust case, maliciously concocted. Moreover, this judicial mafia is not only persecuting and committing crimes against me personally; their actions are, to a greater extent, crimes against the nation, the people, and even the entire world and humanity. Below is a brief listing of some of the criminal acts of this organized crime syndicate:

1. Large-scale violations of China’s Criminal Law and related laws.

Throughout the entire handling of the case, relevant law enforcement personnel committed at least the following criminal acts: judicial corruption (司法腐败), procedural violations(程序违法) (I never saw a search warrant or arrest warrant; my family was not notified for many days after my arrest; verbal abuse, intimidation, beatings, physical punishment, and abuse were standard methods of law enforcement; trials were not public, defense was not allowed, and materials for complaints and reports were not transmitted), illegal detention(非法拘禁), obtaining evidence through violence (暴力取证), extracting confessions through torture (刑讯逼供), abuse of power (滥用职权), distorting facts (歪曲事实), fabricating evidence (捏造证据), spreading rumors and slander (造谣诽谤), perverting the law in adjudication (枉法仲裁), and so on.

Of course, it goes without saying that they have undeniably committed the very offense of “Picking Quarrels and Provoking Trouble (寻衅滋事)” which they maliciously fabricated to impute to me.

All these Illegal and criminal activities they have committed are all obvious and need no further explanation.

2. Comprehensive infringement and brutal trampling of the basic rights granted to citizens by the Constitution.

This group of so-called “guardians of the Constitution,” who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, have clearly forgotten their oaths. Throughout the entire handling of the case, relevant law enforcement personnel completely disregarded the basic rights of citizens and wantonly trampled on them, including the right to life, personal dignity, survival and development, equality, supervision, legitimate property, and various political rights.

Among these, for someone like me, whose sole goal is the pursuit of personal intellectual growth and spiritual freedom, what I find most heartbreaking is the judicial mafia’s brutal interference with and trampling of citizens’ freedom of speech, thought, and belief. I will elaborate a little more on this aspect.

Freedom of speech, thought, and belief is the essence of human nature. Marx pointed out that they are the most sacred, the foundation of human survival and development, and the basis of everything else. Great scientists like Einstein considered them the sole criterion for choosing nationality, and this was certainly not for show.

The Chinese Constitution stipulates these rights and freedoms without restrictions: citizens have the right to express their thoughts and opinions on various political and social issues through various forms of language, including the freedom of information, emotions, propositions, views, and ideas. The relevant law enforcement personnel’s restriction and suppression of this basic right of citizens under the pretext of combating rumors is a complete misunderstanding of the basic principles of law. The Criminal Law and other specific laws have clear and detailed provisions on related crimes, providing the necessary conditions for crime and legal responsibility. These laws are actually necessary conditions to prevent the abuse of public power and further protect the rights of citizens, and are of course also the basic basis for protecting the law enforcement officers themselves.

In this case, the law enforcement officers, based on their personal subjective will, determined that other individuals’ emotional expressions, artistic creation and appreciation, and exchanges and critiques of different ideas and viewpoints were rumors, and denied them. This is utterly absurd. In essence, this practice not only completely deprives citizens of this basic right, but is also a complete denial and subversion of thousands of years of human civilization.

The relevant law enforcement personnel in this case disregarded the supreme legal force of the Constitution and did not carefully study and scrutinize the specific provisions and interpretations of specific laws. They acted arbitrarily, not only harming the legitimate rights and interests of other citizens, endangering the nation and the people, and even the common interests of all mankind, but also pushing themselves into the abyss of crime.

3. Comprehensive violation and denial of the Party and the state’s various lines, principles, and policies.

As mentioned earlier, this judicial mafia has completely denied the entire human civilization, and naturally, it is also a denial and subversion of Chinese civilization as part of it. A specific manifestation of this is the comprehensive violation of the current Party and state lines, principles, and policies in China.

1. First, I am most interested in the vision and instructions on building a community with a shared future for mankind, which are strongly advocated, personally deployed, and personally directed by the current leadership core, President Xi Jinping, in recent years. This initiative not only continues the traditional Chinese ideas of “the unity of heaven and man (天人合一)” and “all people are my brothers and sisters, and all things are my companions (民胞物与),” but also coincides with the research results of modern ecology (for example, the Gaia theory).

The vision of a community with a shared future for mankind requires respect for the diversity of world civilizations in cultural exchanges. President Xi Jinping has given clear instructions on this: “We must transcend civilizational estrangement with cultural exchange, cultural conflict with mutual learning, and civilizational superiority with coexistence. We must firmly establish a view of civilization that is equal, mutually learning, dialogical, and inclusive.”

President Xi Jinping patiently teaches us:

“Every civilization is rooted in its own soil of existence, embodies the extraordinary wisdom and spiritual pursuits of a country and nation, and has its own value…”

“The thoughts and cultures of different countries and nations have their own characteristics, and there is only a difference in color, not a distinction between superior and inferior…”

“Every civilization is a crystallization of beauty and embodies the beauty of creation…All beautiful things are connected, and the human pursuit and yearning for beautiful things cannot be stopped by any force…We should appreciate the beauty of others and appreciate the beauty of all (美人之美，美美与共)…”

“We should adhere to the idea that the world is rich and colorful, and civilizations are diverse, let the various civilizations created by mankind shine together, weave a brilliant and colorful picture, jointly eliminate the cultural barriers in real life, jointly resist the conceptual fallacies that hinder human spiritual interaction, jointly break down the spiritual barriers that hinder human cultural exchanges, let various civilizations coexist harmoniously, and let everyone enjoy the nourishment of culture…”

and so on.

President Xi’s elaborations in this regard are vast and unwavering. These teachings are known to everyone, have not only entered primary and secondary school textbooks, but have also been announced to the world, have received widespread international praise, and are promoting substantial projects such as the “Belt and Road Initiative.” He has shown the world the foresight and grandeur of the Chinese government and people, and pointed out a broad Chinese-style path for the further development of human civilization.

In contrast, the actions of the relevant law enforcement personnel in this case are undoubtedly a slap in the face of President Xi Jinping! Obviously, as President Xi’s concept of a “community with a shared future for mankind” demonstrates, a true community of shared future is neither a Hobbesian jungle of survival competition, nor a utopian forced equality, but a quantum state of civilization where “each appreciates its own beauty, and appreciates the beauty of others.” Any act of placing narrow political prejudices above the truth is a violent tailoring of the genetic makeup of human civilization, a brutal strangulation of the brilliant flowers of human civilization, and a crime against all mankind and civilization.

2. Secondly, as I have already explained, dismissing and denying various normal debates and criticisms that have occurred in the development of human civilization (such as “Trump’s speech criticizing communism”) as “rumors” will shake the epistemological foundation of our country’s current economic, political, cultural, and “one country, two systems” policies, and thus also constitute a denial and subversion of these systems and policies. Of course, these aspects are not all, and I will add one more point here.

In the final Criminal Ruling of this case [Refer to This Court believes that:], the Kunming judicial mafia pointed out that cyberspace is not a place outside the law, and that expressing opinions, forwarding information, and publishing comments in it must be done in accordance with the law.

Obviously, in their minds, the law is a useful tool for them to satisfy their personal desires and suppress ordinary people. They seem to have little understanding that the law is actually a more stringent constraint and restriction mechanism for relevant law enforcement personnel.

Therefore, law enforcement personnel who wear the national emblem and represent the country should be even more cautious in their words and deeds, because the cyberspace they are in (national legal and government websites, academic exchanges, etc.) is clearly not comparable to the general social networks such as Twitter and Youtube that I mainly use for entertainment, leisure, and information gathering.

Spreading rumors that I, an insignificant little person, “deliberately spread rumors” and “insulted and attacked the core” is a trivial matter; but arbitrarily slandering and attacking domestic and foreign academic, political, and business leaders is a serious matter, because many of the original authors of the posts involved are US congressmen, government officials, the Secretary of State, and even the President. Falsely accusing them of “spreading rumors” is actually an “attack and insult” to them. I predicted earlier that their behavior is very likely to trigger an avalanche mechanism of complex network system dynamics, and these are some of the factors considered.

In addition, the social networks I participate in are basically overseas social networks. The posts I forwarded that were fabricated by the Kunming police as “ironclad evidence of crime” were mainly written by foreign scholars or politicians. Attempting to arrogantly implement Chinese law on such networks and the original authors of the posts seems to clearly violate the principle of non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs, infringe on other countries’ sovereignty, violate basic diplomatic principles, and easily lead to diplomatic conflicts and international disputes, undermining our country’s hard-won peaceful development environment.

4. Violation of the rules and discipline of the Communist Party of China.

What makes me, an independent scholar who has never joined the Communist Party or any of its youth organizations, find it ridiculous is that throughout the entire trial process, relevant law enforcement personnel repeatedly reprimanded and insulted me for “eating the Party’s food and smashing the Party’s pot.” Although the final judgment was deliberately obfuscated, it was clearly based on the CPC Constitution and Party discipline in sentencing me.

What makes me laugh even more is that the actions of the relevant law enforcement personnel are actually a comprehensive harm to the interests of their own party.

In fact, as members and followers of the Communist Party of China, the relevant law enforcement personnel in this case should abide by the Party Constitution and the oath they took upon joining the Party, and deeply understand the decisive significance of the “two establishments (两个确立)” and achieve the “two safeguards (两个维护).” As public officials who are guardians of the Chinese Constitution, they should also abide by their oaths and commitments to the Chinese Constitution and serve all taxpayers who are their “providers.” However, they deliberately mystified (故弄玄虚), grasped at straws (捕风捉影), played to the gallery (哗众取宠), acted like gods and ghosts (装神弄鬼), privately “judged the leader’s intentions with a petty mind (以小人之心度领袖之腹),” used the pretext of “safeguarding the leader’s personal reputation,” played the trick of “low-level red, high-level black (低级红高级黑),” openly organized a judicial mafia, held positions without doing their duties (尸位素餐), were derelict in their duties (不务正业), swaggered and deceived (招摇撞骗), were negligent in their duties (玩忽职守), acted arbitrarily (肆意妄为), cruelly suppressed (穷凶极恶) and framed legitimate citizens and taxpayers who are their “providers,” and fundamentally denied the various lines, principles, policies, and initiatives of the CPC, which are designated as national policies, including the market economy, political system reform, comprehensive rule of law, comprehensive and strict governance of the Party, “one country, two systems,” and a community with a shared future for mankind.

The extent of their audacity is astonishing. They have clearly not only openly violated the national Constitution, Criminal Law, and other laws and regulations, as well as the CPC Constitution and Party discipline, but also completely betrayed and reacted against the Communist Party of China and its lofty ideals and cause.

---

VI. Personal Plan and Determination

It is necessary to point out that, although I have spent considerable space highlighting the reckless actions of the Kunming judicial gang, which represent a complete denial and betrayal of the Party, the country, and even the cause of humanity’s shared future, this does not mean I endorse or admire the ideologies or governing philosophies they supposedly represent. My actions stem solely from the conscience of a scholar.

Moreover, as I am personally implicated in this case, I must point out that, even from the perspective of the “ruling class’s ideology,” the actions of the Kunming judicial gang are outright criminal.

Furthermore, it should be clarified that the preceding text also touches upon various other domestic and international ideologies and schools of thought. My reposting and analysis of content related to them does not imply my approval or endorsement of these ideas. I am merely an independent scholar, never confined by the constraints of any particular school or doctrine. Or, as the Kunming police have labeled me, an “unemployed vagrant,” a “Party and state outcast,” a person with “four lacks” and “five losses” – I possess nothing but an “independent mind and a free spirit (独立之思想，自由之精神).”

From a personal standpoint, my lifelong pursuit and endeavor have been to learn, critique, and integrate diverse academic viewpoints with an inclusive attitude, aiming to achieve a more scientific, profound, and harmonious understanding of objective reality. To criminalize a scholar’s simple, pure, and noble academic exploration with insulting charges like “deliberately spreading rumors” and “picking quarrels and provoking trouble,” and to impose a criminal sentence, is undoubtedly a complete denial of my lifelong, tireless pursuit of truth. Clearly, such a verdict and its execution not only destroy my academic reputation and career but also inflict inhumane persecution on my body and mind.

I believe that scoundrels like Li Xiangyun, Pu Huijun, and Ge Bin, who disregard human life, can never comprehend the devastating consequences experienced by a scholar when their life’s work, already infused into their very being and cherished as their most precious possession, is ruthlessly and brutally extracted like a living organ. These uneducated and uncivilized individuals can never understand the helpless choices and tragic fates of great and pure souls throughout history, such as Socrates, Jesus of Nazareth, Wang Guowei, and Alan Turing.

I am already an elderly man approaching 50, alone and penniless, having long lost the ability to defend my legitimate rights and interests. The Kunming judicial gang, after thorough investigation and confirmation of this fundamental fact, dared to subject me to cruel humiliation and persecution with such impunity. This unjust and unwarranted accusation of “fabricated charges” is an unbearable and fatal blow to me, and I must face it bravely. In the limited remaining journey of my life, solely for the sake of human dignity, I will forever maintain my accountability for this case. My life will not cease, and my fight will not end. As for how the relevant authorities handle and respond to this, whether they continue to condone or even encourage the judicial gang, or whether they severely stop and punish them, I am not interested and have no expectations.

It is foreseeable that the Kunming judicial gang, with Pu Huijun and others as their henchmen and thugs, along with their behind-the-scenes masterminds and protective umbrella, will laugh heartily. As the saying goes, “When the lowest scholar hears the Tao, he laughs greatly. If he did not laugh, it would not be worthy of being the Tao (下士闻道必将大笑，不笑不足以为道).” But after their laughter, there will undoubtedly be more cruel, ruthless, and violent smear and retaliatory actions against me. I am mentally prepared for this and will calmly face their various bloody tactics, because any further smear and retaliatory actions on their part will only serve as further material and evidence for my analysis and research.

However, as Mao Zedong pointed out, all reactionaries are paper tigers that fall apart at the first poke. The “magnificent achievement” of the Kunming judicial mafia, who spared no effort, spending vast manpower, material resources, and huge amounts of public funds, racking their brains to meticulously weave an inescapable net to thoroughly discredit me, is nothing more than their own self-ensnaring performance art. The thick volumes of so-called “ironclad criminal evidence” they fabricated against me, based on catching at shadows, evidence they dare not and cannot decently present publicly, still exist completely intact on social networks like Twitter and will remain there forever. In truth, this is their own indelible, eternal shame and the “ironclad evidence” of their crimes. Those meticulously crafted “indictments,” “judgments,” and “rulings” they laboriously fabricated against me, riddled with jurisdictional defects and substantive illegality, have ironically become their own prima facie evidence of criminal and administrative violations under Articles 243 (false accusation crime) and 293 (the crime of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”) of the Criminal Law.

As a scientist, I firmly believe that the objective world is governed by the law of cause and effect. “The cycle of cause and effect, retribution is inevitable” is a Buddhist belief, but it is also a fundamental tenet in my heart. As a new generation of Chinese citizens with a firm belief in China’s strong national construction and national rejuvenation, I believe that Chinese society will inevitably enter the right track of the rule of law, and “heaven’s net is wide, and none can escape” will also be an inevitable historical outcome!

This article is merely the first trumpet call in my lifelong pursuit of accountability. In my remaining years, I will provide a more in-depth and detailed description and exposure of the bloody criminal acts of this judicial gang. It should be noted that I am not a legal professional, and all my descriptions are merely personal opinions from a scholar’s observation perspective. Furthermore, I am currently in a closed prison environment completely isolated from the outside world. All the reposted posts are old, and I have long forgotten the specific content. The judicial gang is also deliberately mystifying and vague, never engaging in specific and clear discussions. Therefore, shortcomings, omissions, and even errors in this article are inevitable. I hope the relevant authorities can understand and forgive me.

Finally, I sincerely hope that the relevant authorities will further investigate the facts and provide an objective, fair, and just resolution!

Respectfully,

Chen Jingyuan, in Kunming Prison

April, 2024

---

[Chinese]