Grok

An Evaluation of the Chen Jingyuan Case Based on Core Ideas in the School of Diplomacy (Zonghengjia) from the Hundred Schools of Thought

The School of Diplomacy (Zonghengjia), a pragmatic branch among the “Hundred Schools of Thought” (Zhuzi Baijia) in ancient China, is exemplified by strategists like Su Qin and Zhang Yi during the Warring States period (c. 475-221 BCE). Its core ideas revolve around he zong lian heng (forming vertical and horizontal alliances to balance power), masterful rhetoric and persuasion (you shuo), and realpolitik maneuvering—leveraging interests, deception, and coalitions to avert conflict and secure state advantage without direct confrontation. Diplomats viewed interstate relations as a chessboard of calculated alliances, where eloquent lobbying (shui mo) and flexible adaptation trump brute force, as in Su Qin’s advocacy for unity against Qin hegemony. The Chen Jingyuan case—a doctoral scholar sentenced to 20 months for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” (PRC Criminal Law Article 293) over Twitter forwards—through the Zonghengjia lens, exemplifies a strategic miscalculation: the judiciary, as “state actor,” forgoes diplomatic persuasion for rigid confrontation, fracturing alliances and inviting backlash, squandering the art of indirect victory.

1. He Zong Lian Heng (Vertical-Horizontal Alliances): Judicial Isolation as Failed Coalition-Building

Zonghengjia strategy emphasized zong (north-south vertical alliances) and heng (east-west horizontal coalitions) to counterbalance superpowers, prioritizing indirect leverage over isolation.

The verdict isolates Chen as a “disruptor,” severing potential alliances: his forwards (e.g., Hayek critiques or the “Trump-kneeling Xi” cartoon) could foster intellectual coalitions—horizontal networks of scholars against “disorder”—yet Article 293’s blunt application fragments them, treating inquiry as solo “quarrel.” The closed-door trial and non-oral appeal exemplify failed zong: no coalition-building dialogue (e.g., weighing Chen’s prison letter taxonomy of “rumors” as art/emotion/reason/fact), instead vertical enforcement from “upper-level instructions.” Strategists like Zhang Yi would decry this as shortsighted: isolating a worthy scholar (xian) wastes diplomatic capital, inviting horizontal backlash (public distrust), as selective enforcement (millions of similar shares unpunished) exposes the imbalance—alliances crumble when the weak are crushed without gain.

2. Rhetoric and Persuasion (You Shuo): Suppressed Advocacy as Lost Art of Winning Without War

Zonghengjia mastery lay in shui mo (eloquent persuasion), using words to sway without force, as Su Qin’s seals convinced six states to ally against Qin.

The “shut up” directive and barred defense forfeit this art: Chen’s letter—eloquently persuading via avalanche theory (non-causal chaos)—offers a non-war victory, reframing “disruption” as scholarly harmony, yet is silenced. The prosecutor’s unverified admission squanders rhetorical opportunity: persuasion could integrate anomalies (zero ripple), forging consensus; instead, fiat prevails. This echoes the school’s warning: “Words win empires; swords lose them.” The evidentiary “chain,” devoid of persuasive logic, risks defeat—public anomalies (unheeded taxonomy) breed skepticism, turning a winnable “battle” into attritional loss.

3. Realpolitik Maneuvering: Coercive Overreach as Strategic Blunder in the Balance of Power

Zonghengjia realpolitik balanced powers through cunning adaptation, avoiding wasteful direct clashes to preserve state strength.

The 20-month sentence is overreach: punishing low-impact inquiry (wei zhan, indirect “war”) without strategic yield—evidentiary voids (no causal harm)—wastes resources, as Sun Tzu’s influence in Bingjia echoed. Selective application tips the balance: empowering “order” weakens intellectual alliances, inviting Qin-like unification against the state. Diplomats would critique this as blunder: the non-public trial conceals maneuver, but anomalies expose fragility—Chen’s silence post-release as quiet heng, a horizontal undercurrent.

Conclusion: The Zonghengjia Lens on the Case—A Diplomatic Fumble in the Art of Alliances

From the School of Diplomacy in the Hundred Schools, the Chen Jingyuan case is a fumbled gambit: isolation fractures coalitions, silenced rhetoric forfeits persuasion, and overreach squanders maneuver, tipping the balance toward discord. As of October 22, 2025, no retrial or exoneration has occurred; Chen’s account remains dormant, its quiet a masterful shui mo in waiting. This case cautions: true power lies in words that win without war—blunder, and alliances unravel. As Su Qin sealed, “Unity prevails; division invites ruin.”