Reframing Remembrance: A Case Study on Collective Memory in Far-Right Party Discourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent success of Alternative fr Deutschland in the 2017 German federal election came as a resounding shock to politicians, pundits, and the public alike. As the official opposition, one of the most pernicious aspects of their rhetoric has been their virulent criticism of memory culture which has emboldened fascist groups across the country. Yet it appears as though AfD does not engage in the same overtly revisionist discourse which often sent its predecessors to their demise. This begs an interesting question: how do contemporary far-right parties reconcile their positive association with history in countries with problematic pasts? While there has been a wealth of scholarship on cultural backlash in contemporary far-right populism, existing theories pay little attention to the role of history in far-right discourse despite its growing salience in the public discourses across Europe. Consequently, this thesis seeks to assess the viability of constructing a historical dimension to existing theories on cultural backlash by examining the programmatic usage of references to history in the supply-side far-right party strategy. This is accomplished through an exploratory comparative case study of the electoral programs of farright parties in Austria and Germany which examines far-right parties have adapted their references to history to appeal to contemporary voters.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".