Nationalism, Necessary and Sufficient for Genocide? A Counterfactual Account through a Comparative Case Study of Nazi Germany, Shōwa Japan, and Fascist Italy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper seeks to explain the counterfactual occurrence of non-genocide under conditions of nationalism, colonialism, and war. Thus, this paper contributes to the debate on the necessary and sufficient conditions for genocidal violence. By controlling for regime type, colonialism, and the presence of nationalism, this paper argues that key junctures in state-formation and specific types of nation-building—namely through total militarization and exclusionary founding narratives—are the conditions that lead societies towards a genocidal turn. The interaction of these elements enables would-be genocidaires to overcome the problem of collective action in mass mobilization. By comparing the similar cases of Nazi Germany, Shōwa Japan, and Fascist Italy, this paper demonstrates how the presence of an exclusionary nationalist ideology in and of itself can be a necessary but insufficient condition, and there are other contingent conditions that must be met in order for elites to be able to mobilize this ideology towards collective and mass violence.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".