{
    "schema": "qaeda-claim-ledger/v1",
    "version": "2.5.0",
    "generated": "2026-09-01",
    "source_of_truth": "https://qaeda.net/claims",
    "status_definitions": {
        "supported": {
            "label": "SUPPORTED",
            "description": "The reviewed source chain supports this bounded claim as written."
        },
        "qualified": {
            "label": "QUALIFIED",
            "description": "The core claim is supported, but an attribution, scope, causal inference, or source limitation remains unresolved."
        },
        "not-verified": {
            "label": "NOT VERIFIED",
            "description": "The reviewed corpus does not establish this claim at the confidence or scope sometimes asserted elsewhere."
        },
        "project-position": {
            "label": "PROJECT POSITION",
            "description": "A normative QAEDA rule informed by the research rather than an empirical fact claim."
        }
    },
    "claims": [
        {
            "claim": "“Rebel or Die” is not verified as an established or representative slogan of Russia’s post-2022 anti-war movement.",
            "status": "not-verified",
            "confidence": "High on the narrower non-verification claim",
            "basis": "The corrective slogan research found no secure dated primary anti-war artifact for the phrase or its obvious Russian equivalents, while much better-attested anti-war and anti-mobilization formulas have dense documentary trails.",
            "uncertainty": "This does not prove that no individual ever used the words. It rejects movement-level or canonical attribution without primary evidence.",
            "would_change": "A securely dated, authenticated anti-war artifact or movement source showing representative use before later reinterpretations.",
            "sources": [
                "rebel-or-die-tracing",
                "russian-mobilization-resistance"
            ],
            "conflicting_sources": [
                "russian-partisan-slogan-analysis",
                "russian-rebel-or-die-analysis"
            ],
            "research": [
                "rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "slogan provenance",
                "negative evidence",
                "Russia",
                "source integrity"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-001",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-or-die-tracing",
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#russian-mobilization-resistance"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "“No to war” and anti-mobilization/refusal language are substantially better documented than “Rebel or Die” in the Russian anti-war repertoire.",
            "status": "supported",
            "confidence": "High",
            "basis": "The reviewed material documents repeated “No to war,” “No to mobilization,” survival, demobilization, family-protection, and refusal language across protests, petitions, street inscriptions, and organizer material.",
            "uncertainty": "Different slogans had different geographic reach and constituencies; documented presence is not the same as universal adoption.",
            "would_change": "A broader primary-source corpus demonstrating that another formulation was more representative over the same period.",
            "sources": [
                "rebel-or-die-tracing",
                "russian-mobilization-resistance"
            ],
            "research": [
                "rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth",
                "resistance-is-not-one-movement"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "anti-war rhetoric",
                "mobilization",
                "refusal"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-002",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-or-die-tracing",
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#russian-mobilization-resistance"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth",
                "https://qaeda.net/research/resistance-is-not-one-movement"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "Russian resistance to mobilization did not form one coherent national movement; it fragmented into distinct forms with different motives and constituencies.",
            "status": "supported",
            "confidence": "High",
            "basis": "The evidence separates street protest, departure from Russia, legal/administrative avoidance, conscientious objection, refusal or unauthorized absence by serving personnel, family activism, and a smaller destructive category.",
            "uncertainty": "Categories overlap in individual cases, and motive is not always recoverable from public records.",
            "would_change": "Evidence of a common command structure, program, membership, or representative national organization spanning these categories.",
            "sources": [
                "russian-mobilization-resistance"
            ],
            "research": [
                "resistance-is-not-one-movement"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "classification",
                "mobilization",
                "movement structure"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-003",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#russian-mobilization-resistance"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/resistance-is-not-one-movement"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "The dominant documented anti-war-related violence in the reviewed Russian corpus is coercion by state bodies against overwhelmingly peaceful dissent.",
            "status": "supported",
            "confidence": "High for the documented corpus",
            "basis": "The repression report documents mass detention, police violence, imprisonment, surveillance, raids, censorship, and related coercion at much larger scale than documented interpersonal violence by ordinary anti-war demonstrators.",
            "uncertainty": "No dataset is complete, and counts across organizations use different units and cutoff dates. “Dominant documented” is not a claim that every incident is known.",
            "would_change": "A comparably comprehensive dataset showing anti-war actors responsible for a larger volume of violence against people over the same scope and period.",
            "sources": [
                "russian-anti-war-repression"
            ],
            "research": [
                "repression-changes-what-dissent-looks-like"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "repression",
                "state coercion",
                "anti-war dissent"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-004",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#russian-anti-war-repression"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/repression-changes-what-dissent-looks-like"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "A collapse in visible street protest is not sufficient evidence that repression relaxed or that consent increased.",
            "status": "qualified",
            "confidence": "Strong inference, not direct measurement of private belief",
            "basis": "The reviewed repression record shows falling street-protest detention numbers alongside continued or harsher criminal, censorship, and security-law pressure, making deterrence and adaptation plausible explanations for lower visibility.",
            "uncertainty": "Private political attitudes cannot be inferred perfectly from enforcement data, and multiple causes can reduce protest participation.",
            "would_change": "Independent longitudinal evidence showing both reduced coercive pressure and increased freely expressed support under comparable conditions.",
            "sources": [
                "russian-anti-war-repression"
            ],
            "research": [
                "repression-changes-what-dissent-looks-like"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "visibility",
                "repression",
                "consent",
                "inference"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-005",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#russian-anti-war-repression"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/repression-changes-what-dissent-looks-like"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "The shorter phrase “It is either rebel or die” is historically attributed to Agnes Smedley by Ben Macintyre, but the underlying primary Smedley source remains unresolved in the reviewed corpus.",
            "status": "qualified",
            "confidence": "Qualified attribution",
            "basis": "Macintyre’s 2020 biography attributes the wording to Smedley, and her 1931 writing strongly corroborates the anti-romantic context, but the underlying letter, manuscript, or archival citation has not been located here.",
            "uncertainty": "The attribution may ultimately be verified if Macintyre’s source or another primary Smedley document is recovered.",
            "would_change": "A primary Smedley document containing the exact phrase, or archival documentation identifying Macintyre’s source.",
            "sources": [
                "rebel-or-die-genealogy"
            ],
            "research": [
                "rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth",
                "context-before-lexical-judgment"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "Agnes Smedley",
                "quotation",
                "historical attribution"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-006",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-or-die-genealogy"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth",
                "https://qaeda.net/research/context-before-lexical-judgment"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "The added clause “And often it is rebel and die” should not presently be quoted as authenticated Agnes Smedley wording.",
            "status": "not-verified",
            "confidence": "High on the present provenance boundary",
            "basis": "The earliest directly inspectable complete two-clause form located in the provenance research is Daniel Tutt’s 2023 essay; the earlier Macintyre wording stops after “die,” and no primary Smedley text containing the extension was located.",
            "uncertainty": "Tutt may have drawn from an uncited Smedley source that has not yet been found.",
            "would_change": "An earlier primary or reliably archived Smedley source containing the complete two-clause wording.",
            "sources": [
                "rebel-or-die-genealogy"
            ],
            "conflicting_sources": [
                "smedley-proletarian-analysis"
            ],
            "research": [
                "rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "quotation",
                "provenance",
                "Agnes Smedley"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-007",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-or-die-genealogy"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/rebel-or-die-provenance-before-myth"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "For the supplied corrupted string, “the orange revelation” is the highest-confidence textual reconstruction because the surviving fragments join exactly.",
            "status": "supported",
            "confidence": "High as string reconstruction",
            "basis": "Removing the inserted interface token and rejoining “reve” + “lation” produces “revelation” without changing surviving letters.",
            "uncertainty": "Reconstructing the text does not identify which real-world referent, if any, the phrase was intended to name.",
            "would_change": "A more complete original string showing different surrounding text or demonstrating that the apparent insertion boundary was misleading.",
            "sources": [
                "orange-revelation-investigation"
            ],
            "research": [
                "orange-revelation-reconstruct-before-interpret"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "string forensics",
                "entity resolution",
                "Orange Revelation"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-008",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#orange-revelation-investigation"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/orange-revelation-reconstruct-before-interpret"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "Ukraine’s Orange Revolution is an important political near-match, but it is not the best reconstruction of the exact corrupted “reve…lation” string.",
            "status": "supported",
            "confidence": "High on textual distinction",
            "basis": "“Revelation” preserves the surviving letters exactly, whereas “revolution” would require different letters; the historically established political phrase is “Orange Revolution,” not a movement formally called “Orange Revelation.”",
            "uncertainty": "A damaged source could still have intended the Orange Revolution if other missing context points there.",
            "would_change": "Original surrounding text or metadata tying the corrupted phrase directly to the 2004 Ukrainian event.",
            "sources": [
                "orange-revelation-investigation"
            ],
            "research": [
                "orange-revelation-reconstruct-before-interpret"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "Orange Revolution",
                "near match",
                "entity resolution"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-009",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#orange-revelation-investigation"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/orange-revelation-reconstruct-before-interpret"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "Politically severe language should be interpreted contextually rather than treated as violent solely because a charged word or death metaphor appears.",
            "status": "project-position",
            "confidence": "Normative editorial rule",
            "basis": "The phrase genealogy shows materially different uses across historical analysis, art, pop culture, philosophy, and explicitly nonviolent civil disobedience. QAEDA therefore distinguishes documentary context, nonviolent disruption, and advocacy of harm.",
            "uncertainty": "Contextual review does not imply permissibility of concrete threats, operational attack guidance, or celebration of violence.",
            "would_change": "This is a project rule; changing it requires explicit editorial review rather than a single new empirical source.",
            "sources": [
                "rebel-or-die-genealogy",
                "rebel-or-die-tracing"
            ],
            "research": [
                "context-before-lexical-judgment"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "contextual moderation",
                "cognitive liberty",
                "rhetoric"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-010",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-or-die-genealogy",
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-or-die-tracing"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/context-before-lexical-judgment"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "QAEDA treats civilian protection, individual responsibility, and rejection of collective guilt as non-negotiable ethical boundaries of political resistance.",
            "status": "project-position",
            "confidence": "Normative project rule",
            "basis": "The foundational ethics report separates the justice of a grievance from the justice of methods and places civilian immunity, individualized responsibility, accountability, and less harmful means above collective vengeance.",
            "uncertainty": "This is a normative commitment, not a claim that historical resistance movements universally followed it.",
            "would_change": "Only explicit owner-level revision of the project’s protected ethical posture; ordinary source disagreement does not silently change it.",
            "sources": [
                "ethics-of-force"
            ],
            "research": [
                "resistance-needs-moral-limits"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "civilian protection",
                "nonviolence",
                "collective guilt"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-011",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#ethics-of-force"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/resistance-needs-moral-limits"
            ]
        },
        {
            "claim": "QAEDA uses the Replication Test as an institutional diagnostic: liberation claims are stronger when people retain meaningful ability to refuse, challenge, exit, fork, replace, or remove power after the challenger succeeds.",
            "status": "project-position",
            "confidence": "Normative diagnostic grounded in reviewed research",
            "basis": "The rebel-archetype research asks whether victory reproduces a throne or leaves others with greater capacity to refuse and replace authority; QAEDA applies that diagnostic to political institutions, organizations, platforms, and AI governance.",
            "uncertainty": "The Replication Test is an evaluative framework, not a complete theory of legitimacy and not a guarantee of good outcomes.",
            "would_change": "Explicit project-level revision or stronger reviewed reasoning showing that the diagnostic systematically misclassifies bounded authority.",
            "sources": [
                "rebel-archetype"
            ],
            "research": [
                "rebellion-and-the-replication-test"
            ],
            "tags": [
                "Replication Test",
                "exit",
                "contestability",
                "institutional design"
            ],
            "id": "CLM-012",
            "source_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/sources#rebel-archetype"
            ],
            "research_links": [
                "https://qaeda.net/research/rebellion-and-the-replication-test"
            ]
        }
    ]
}