Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Defence of Multinational Citizenship. Siobhan Harty and Michael Murphy. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2005. 206 pp. $32.95 sc. Will Kymlicka's work on multicultural citizenship and minority cultural rights (1995) has inaugurated a field for political scientists, social theorists, and assorted cultural critics. Siobhan Harty and Michael Murphy's volume extends project of delineating rights of Aboriginals, substates, and ethnic communities within context of globalized citizenship and problems of state sovereignty. The basic assumption here rejects notions of globalized, non-territorial citizenships: Harty and Murphy argue that even in transnational forms of identity, territorial identities remain important. Aboriginals, for example, are loyal to territorial forms of identity. What is therefore needed is multinational citizenship, where notions of sovereignty, citizenship, and belonging, and even democracy, will have to be recast. Hart), and Murphy define multinational citizenship as something that gives equal recognition to citizenship regimes of state and substate nations through a democratic argument for self-determination at substate level and a revised conception of state sovereignty that is divided and shared (p. 3). Self-determination is central to minorities, especially if they have to belonginguess (or citizenship) within a state, and they argue that self-determination is a right. Regional decision-making processes should ensure participation of Aboriginals and substate people in state's democratic processes. The early chapters survey theories of citizenship and belonging. Citizenship, they argue, must be differentiated--Harty and Murphy repeatedly emphasize that differentiated citizenship or self-determination does not mean secession--for all peoples to feel empowered. Looking at several multination states, especially in Europe, Harry and Murphy agree that multiple ethnicities and loyalties often troubled nation-building and stability. The issue of 'unnational citizenship (where equality between majority and minority is guaranteed by renunciation of national character by state) is discussed with regard to two areas: centralized nature of political authority and role of sovereign nation-state. Unfortunately, citizenship is even today tied up with state nationalism, they argue. The liberal nationalist response to debate has been to turn to issues of moral commitment (e.g., Richard Rorty) or a defence of nationalism that takes recourse in liberal-communitarianism (e.g., Kymlicka). In most of these cases, argue Harty and Murphy, thinkers turn to culturalist arguments. Their point is simple: the democratic right to self-determination should not be subordinated to choice one makes (or does not make) regarding matters of culture (p. 66). In order to achieve such a condition of self-determination, they propose three principles: internal democracy (a nation's right to choose how and by whom it will be governed), external democracy (a nation's right to govern itself as freely as possible from external interference or domination), and shared-rule democracy (the doctrine of autonomy of nations and idea of self-rule). …
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.006 |
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".