MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124044201 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v1n3p84

“Political Volcano” in 12th Malaysian General Election: Makkal Sakhti (People Power) Against Communal Politics, “3Cs” and Marginalization of Malaysian Indian

2008· article· en· W3124044201 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kim-Hui Lim, Wai Mun Har

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsGeneral electionPolitical sciencePower (physics)Political economyLanguage changeTamilHatredPovertyIndependence (probability theory)Development economicsSociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malaysian politic has been overwhelmingly dominated by the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition since 1969. In the 12th Malaysian General Election, the ruling coalition suffered a shocking moral defeat. This paper argue that the 12th Malaysian General Election is metaphorically a political volcano eruption, witnessing the rise of People Power against suppression of dissatisfactions over communal politics, deteriorating social-economic conditions (dubbed the “3Cs” factors) and continues marginalization of Indian community in Malaysia. Aspects of communal politics include (1) the issues of NEP, Ketuanan Melayu, racism and “second-class citizen” treatment to the Malaysian non-bumiputera, and (2) the issues of UMNO-putra politicizing the NEP and Malay poverty. The “3Cs” refers to dissatisfaction over increasing (1) cost of living, (2) crime and (3) corruption, taking the first letter of each to form the acronym. Meanwhile, the revolution by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) highlighted the marginalization of Indian. Indeed, the Hindraf revolution popularized the Makkal Sakhti that means “People Power” in Tamil.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicAsian Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207