Q5 - Political scientist: Some analysts point to the

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Necessary Assumption

Stimulus Breakdown:
Rephrased conclusion: The government doesn't support popular expression.
Premise: Supporting popular expression requires supporting things you disagree with, and the allowed protest was something the government supports.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion is very extreme, and it's based on only one example that aligns with, well, the opposite conclusion. In order to prove this conclusion, the political scientist should show the government cracking down on a protest, not allowing one. Let's be on the lookout for answers that bring up the government not supporting a protest with which they disagree.

Correct answer:
(C)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Out of scope. It's not necessary for the government to help organize a protest in order to support it. This also aligns with the example already given, which is the opposite of what is needed for the conclusion.

(B) Out of scope. The poliscientist cares about whether the government supports the message, not whether the message is about the government.

(C) Bingo. If we negate this to the government accepting messages it opposes, that kills the argument.

(D) Out of scope. The argument cares about government support or opposition. The perception of potential retaliation by a group doesn't speak to the actual actions of the government - in other words, these fears could be unwarranted.

(E) Out of scope. Any feared backlash is a potential explanation for this situation, but it's not the only (i.e., it's not a necessary) one.

Takeaway/Pattern:
When the conclusion references an earlier idea, rephrase it to better understand what the author's conclusion is.

#officialexplanation

[BrittaniW854]

i believe the Correct Answer is C.

[hannaht28]

Could you explain why its C and not B? I was under the assumption that it would be B.
hack bigo live