Back to the Future: The paradoxical Revival of Aspirations for an Islamic State
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noah Feldman's most recent publication seeks to explain the apparently paradoxical rise of grassroots political movements in the Islamic world (and especially the Arab Middle East) demanding the resurrection of an Islamic state, movements often broadly referred to as "Islamist." In a field that is dominated by specialists who usually write for specialists, his book is a welcome addition to the literature on the modern idea of an Islamic state. It gives a highly readable and accessible account of the history of Islamic law, its relationship to Islamic ideals of governance and why that history and those ideals remain relevant to large numbers of politically active Muslims in the modern world. Its policy recommendations, specifically, the need for the United States to engage positively with Islamic movements committed to the democratized version of Islamic law he describes may be controversial, but he argues for them with some force: a democratized version of Islamic law is being developed by indigenous Muslim elites that on its own terms can reasonably be viewed as a progressive development in the governance of those societies, and that to the extent such movements enjoy democratic legitimacy, U.S. opposition to their political success represents a betrayal of U.S. values, and potentially, U.S. interests as well. While features of his account of the classical Islamic state and the history of governance in the Arab/Islamic world in last 150 years are highly problematic (as discussed below), it nevertheless fills an important gap in the non-specialist literature on the history of the idea of an Islamic state.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it