Abstract: In the academia, the rightprotection activities by Chinese peasants have been categorized as “resistance on a daily basis”, “fighting with legal rights”, and “going by regulations”. The present study was based on two land expropriation cases in northeast Guangxi. The study revealed that the general features of the rightprotection activities by the peasants involved could be summarized as “fighting with rationality and legality”, the expression of which was some kind in between “resistance on a daily basis” and “fighting with legal rights” within the scope of being “rational” and “legal” when determining the rationales for behavior, selecting strategies, and setting goals. To be more specific, the peasants actively used the strategy of delaying the handover of the land to be expropriated for a better price, adopted the behavioral strategy based on both rationality and legality in collective actions, ensured control over the situation, and tried to avoid collisions with the local governments. This kind of resistance had its root in the rural culture and the tension due to the legitimacy of the Chinese government’s strong need for social stability and the local government’s desire for economic achievements and its efforts to maintain stability, all of which had led to a kind of “unspoken agreement” to let the peasants in the rightprotection activities have an equal voice in the dialogue with the local government. When the government comprised a bit, the peasants made advances; when the government became firm, the peasants compromised a bit. Both sides utilized their respective political and social resources to fight for a resolution that would be in the best interest to itself. The pragmatism in the peasants’ rightprotection activities was the survival strategy and action logic of these peasants who were living in the peripheral region of the structural network woven by power and interests.
Keywords：

Key words: peasants&rsquo, fights to protect rights ,  , interpretive framework ,  fighting with rationality and legality