Analyzing the Wide Pankurdism from the Copenhagen School and Constructivism Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the (post–Cold War era), one can see violence, ethnic and religious changes in the Middle East more than any other regions in the world. In the recent years, changes and rises have made this region the central place for ethnic and religious crisis around the world. The present study aims to answer this basic question framed through two theoretical approaches of constructivism and Copenhagen school. That is, what are the most influential reasons for spreading pankurdism in the Kurdish-resident regions in the Middle East? In order to answer this question, the research hypothesis is based on some influential elements including self-governance experience in Iraqi Kurdistan as the heart and the locus for forming the dream of great Kurdistan, appearance and activation of new generation of leaders, Kurdish party and civil actors. It also includes intensification of awareness and ethnic identity-orientation among young Kurdish people, the fragility of the government in Iraq, collapse of authority in Syria and appearance and proceeding of Islamic state of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) forces. In this paper, the research method is analytical-causal explanation. The most important findings of the study is that the combination of reasons cause to make spread of pankurdism in the Kurdish-resident region and their convergence effective. These reasons are the identification among the Kurds as the result of dissatisfactions, humiliation, and suppression during several decades, the successful experience of autonomy in the Kurdish-resident regions, and collapse and fragility of authority in Syria and Iraq. In the near future, such increasing opportunities and convergences of the historical and main identity can prepare the Kurds to put pressure on the governments for autonomy or even their independency.
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 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".