Højreradikalismen i Danmark - en politik model på historisk-sociologisk grund
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rene Karpantschof: The Radical Right in Denmark: a historical sociological perspective for a model of politics During the past quarter century, disputes connected to the radical right and the related issue of immigration have occupied a central field of contention in Danish society. Governments have been brought down, the party system has been radically reshuffled, a new and polarized agenda has emerged in media and in parliament, popular attitudes have changed, and the pattern of grassroots participation has shifted. Social scientists have tended to restrict their analyses of this situation to the “view of specialist“, approaching the phenomena in question through the perspectives of civic culture, policy and party system conditions, public opinion creation, or social movement struggle. The present article suggests another approach, employing a historical-sociological perspective that analyses the political turn as a consequence of processes and causal mechanisms involving and intersecting all these above-mentioned elements. The article also develops a model of politics as regards the manner in which societal actors act and struggle for symbols and identities in a contingent environment of specific political circumstances and interaction. This model finds important processes and causal mechanisms related to four main dynamics: (1) identity formation, (2) interplay between institutionalised politics and protest, (3) movement-countermovement interaction, and (4) national-international relations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".