Chinese Generals
In 209 BC, Chen Shen was ordered to lead 900 soldiers to Yuyang, near present-day Beijing, to help defend the northern border against Xiongnu. Due to storms, it became clear that they could not get to Yuyang by the deadline, and according to law, if soldiers could not get to their posts on time, they would be executed. Chen Sheng, believing that he was doomed, led his soldiers to start a rebellion. His act of defiance provided the spark of inspiration which eventually led to the fall of the Qin dynasty.
(lightly adapted from Wikipedia)
Coming up with his troops on the banks of the Rubicon, which was the boundary of his province, he halted for a while, and, revolving in his mind the importance of the step he was on the point of taking, he turned to those about him, and said: “We may still retreat: but if we pass this little bridge, nothing is left for us but to fight it out in arms.”
There was a very ancient law of the republic, forbidding any general, returning from the wars, to cross the Rubicon with his troops under arms.
While he was thus hesitating, the following incident occurred. A person remarkable for his noble mien and graceful aspect, appeared close at hand, sitting and playing upon a pipe. When, not only the shepherds, but a number of soldiers also flocked from their posts to listen to him, and some trumpeters among them, he snatched a trumpet from one of them, ran to the river with it, and sounding the advance with a piercing blast, crossed to the other side. Upon this, Caesar exclaimed, “Let us go where the omens of the Gods and the iniquity of our enemies call us. The die is now cast.”
C. Suetonius Tranquillus, Divus Julius, 31-32
The classical parallel to the story of Chen Shen, the Chinese General, is Julius Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon; once the alea was iacta, Caesar marked himself as a threat to Rome, and hence had to conquer or be destroyed. But Caesar chose the situation, whereas a Chinese General is placed into the situation by others. The two stories are at opposite ends of a spectrum, defined by the control the protagonist was able to exert over the situation.
The standard lesson from this story is that you should avoid creating Chinese Generals; if you impose maximum penalties for minor transgressions, then you encourage minor miscreants to commit maximum mischief. But another lesson, perhaps, is that when you think that you’re the Chinese General, you might actually be Julius Caesar. You might think you have nothing to lose from escalation - but you might be wrong.
A band of young engineers, under the banner of DOGE, has been enlisted to cut US federal government spending. The DOGE team has been stamped from the beginning; the association with Musk and Trump, the stated purpose to eliminate jobs and cut budgets, and the explicitly anti-woke agenda, make them intolerable to large sections of the left. As such, they seem to be Chinese Generals: they were condemned by Democrats before they made a single recommendation. In that context, a Chinese General would abandon nuance and bipartisan sensibilities; why make concessions if the left is going to hate you whatever you do?
This is a bit like being a right-winger on a university campus; the story might go something like this:
A student self-identifies as conservative on some economic issues; perhaps they read some Thomas Sowell, or Milton Friedman.
They might recognise that these opinions are instrumentally useful as well as intellectually attractive; they’re aligned with a desirable career and social class.
However, they also recognise that many fellow students do not share these opinions, and mark them as out-group, perhaps by calling them a “corporate sell-out”.
At this point, the student perceives themselves as a Chinese General; they’ve been ostracised for holding a reasonable set of views;
With this perception, the student leans into less thoughtful, more vindictive, and more fun right wing views. They start mocking and victimising their own out-group, while loosening epistemic standards and engaging in self-congratulation. In for a penny, in for a pound!
Once someone thinks they’re a Chinese General, they escalate into polarisation and cruelty, which leads to worse outcomes for everyone. You can see this in magazines like Pirate Wires, the Spectator; fair-minded arguments are mixed with unnecessary tribal condescension.
In the same way, a failure mode for DOGE would be to become vindictive; to lose sight of worthy goals, and descend into fun ones. If you’re already being unfairly criticised by the out-group, why not play tit-for-tat, and own the libs? Cut USAID budgets, cut grant funding, don’t bother checking your work, just slash and burn. It’s worth noting that DOGE currently have pretty good approval ratings in America as a whole; but if they are provoked by Beltway outrage into acting like the Chinese General when they’re actually Julius Caesar, they’ll jeopardise that approval.
So there’s two strategic mistakes being made here. First, the Democrats should reserve their fury for actual problems, rather than an aesthetic distaste for Musk projects and a self-interested desire to keep the pork-barrel full. But at the same time, the DOGE team needs to recognise that they are more like Caesar than the Chinese General; the opposition they currently face could be much worse, and they still get to choose how fair-minded and effective they want to be. Let’s hope they do a great job!