Bibliographic record
Abstract
Part III examines the normative and institutional dimensions of modes of reconciliation and conflict management in multinational democracies. In chapter 11, Allen Patten explores two claims made by proponents of the liberal idea of citizenship: (1) that a shared national identity is one of the most important conditions of citizenship (2) that citizens of a state should have a single national identity. Patten's primary concern is whether nation-building projects within multinational societies represent a threat to this liberal ideal of citizenship. Although Patten concludes that nation-building and national-independence projects do contradict the liberal idea of citizenship by conflicting with ‘the right to equal recognition of identity in the public sphere’, he does point to an alternative way in which the demands of nationalist movements can be accommodated without compromising liberal principles of citizenship. Patten makes the case that a right to equal recognition of identity in the public sphere is one of the entitlements that should be recognized in a liberal theory of citizenship. This principle of equal recognition can conflict with nation-building and national-independence projects because such projects may not provide equal recognition of identity in the public sphere of the new state. From this principle of equal recognition, Patten formulates a new liberal theory of citizenship that is more fitting for the demands of a multinational society than the instrumental nationalist theory of citizenship articulated by classical liberals such as J. S. Mill.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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".