FCM Fallacy & Response | 谬误与回应 is a continuing Free China Movement series examining political claims, rhetorical shortcuts and institutional arguments that deserve more than a slogan in reply.
The purpose is not to caricature opposing views. Each essay begins with the strongest plausible version of the argument, identifies what is valid in it, then examines where the reasoning overreaches. Evidence, counterarguments and falsifiable standards come before labels.
The series follows the same research principle stated in FCM’s working paper on the Great Firewall and innovation: “The theory must survive because of evidence, not because every result is reinterpreted to support it.”
Related FCM research: The Innovation Tax of the Great Firewall — Working Paper 0.5.
Series
- No. 1 — 有协商，就等于有民主吗？——“功能性民主”论证里的偷换
Why consultation, policy feedback and state capacity should not be confused with democratic accountability, and why criticism of electoral democracy does not by itself establish an alternative system as democratic.
Future entries will continue to distinguish the strongest version of a claim from the logical leap being challenged, and will link both FCM research and outside scholarship where relevant.