Democratization as a Protective Layering for Crimes Against Humanity: The Case of Myanmar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myanmar has a history of state sanctioned violence against its own people. However, as the regime transition occurs the methods of conducting such violence have also changed. This has not led to an end to violence but an alteration in the methods used by the state. What can be identified is the use of democratic regime transition to legitimise the state’s actions whilst delegitimising the plight of communities that have historically resisted the state. By engaging in the minimal standards of democratic practice whilst developing relations with the international community on the basis of trade, Myanmar has been able to create a protective layering system for its continued human rights abuses within its borderlands. This paper will analyse how Myanmar has effectively coopted the international community into ignoring the continuation of human rights abuses by creating an effectives market for its valuable resources. It will focus on the cases in Karen and Kachin State, two sub-regions within Myanmar that have experienced prolonged conflict and where human rights abuses continue with little oversight from the international community.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".