All good points, Anthony. Obviously, the "pragmatism" I was referring to was his approach to the question of unity against the common enemy of the Chinese people. He did what no one else had done before, bringing Chiang to his knees and forcing a most unlikely ad hoc alliance smack in the middle of a bloody civil war. There is, of course, rarely any practical value in getting oneself arrested and imprisoned but it's not completely out the question in some cases. The case of Indian revolutionary Bhagat Singh is a good example of the political power of martyrdom, as the trial of Singh and his compatriots gained much attention and sympathy for the Socialist Republican Army. But, more to your point -- Chang was not really a martyr. A hero nonetheless, but not really a martyr. There is a good article from The Guardian about the children of the Long March. The fate of some of the children was pretty awful, arguably similar to the actions of the women at Zalongo during the Greek War of Independence. The children of Mao and He Zizhen were among some of the luckier ones, having been adopted by peasants while the Red Army marched on. As far as Chang's morals and sense of honor, you are probably right. It is my understanding that it was his deep love of China which drove his actions as opposed to political allegiance and the like. But the obit from The Economist notes that Chang sincerely believed he would simply receive a very simple reprimand when he voluntarily appeared before the Nationalist court. At any rate, I am sure he did not expect to be imprisoned for over 50 years. It is very possible that he simply did not count on the ruthlessness of Chiang and his KMT stooges. Perhaps he projected his sense of honor on to Chiang, which was obviously an unfortunate miscalculation.