Мультикультурализм как социальная теория и политическая практика // Multiculturalism as Social Theory and Political Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
В статье анализируется одна из моделей интеграционной политики полиэтнического населения – мультикультурализм. Показано, что на практике мультикультурализм – это не безусловное признание культурных различий, а своего рода компромисс между государством, представляющим культуру большинства, и меньшинствами. Хотя более чем 30-летняя апробация концепции мультикультурализма в таких странах, как США, Канада, Австралия, Сингапур, показала, что она не всегда срабатывает именно так, как виделось ее апологетам. И все же конструктивной альтернативы политике мультикультурализма пока нет. The article analyzes multiculturalism, which is one of the models of integration policies in the countries with multi-ethnic population. The authors show that multiculturalism does not mean an unconditional acceptance of cultural differences, but is considered as a sort of compromise between state, representing the culture of the majority, and minorities of the country. Although more than thirty years of testing the concept of multiculturalism in such countries as the USA, Canada, Australia, Singapore, have shown that the concept does not always work in such a way, as its apologists believe, yet a constructive alternative to multiculturalism has not been invented.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".