The politics of memory and commemoration: the flag debate and perspectives of Vietnamese diaspora intellectuals in North America
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
This paper aims to complicate elements proposed in Cohen’s typology of diaspora, which assumes that all diasporic communities speak with one voice with regard to defining moments in their history, as well as the fate of their people going forward. Focusing on the collective identity embodied by the flag, this paper demonstrates the extent to which this collective representation can create both unity and disunity. A symbol which is powerful also has the potential to polarize. My research examines the role of intellectuals in articulating group identity, and the tension they experience as they attempt to navigate a plurality of roles which are often in conflict with one another. Intellectuals are well aware that in their professional capacities as academics/writers/journalists/artists/community representatives, they are compelled to remain objective on political issues. This demand for objectivity may be at variance with both their personal views and the expectation of their community. Data collected through in-depth interviewing reveal that it is often facile and misleading to posit the existence of homogeneity and unity around politics, memory, and commemoration. As Georg Simmel reminded us, conflict is ubiquitous, and may in fact be generative rather than destructive.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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