Denmark as the Big Satan: Projections of Scandinavia in the Arab World and the Future of Multiculturalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the winter and spring of 2006, Denmark and Scandinavia faced its most serious crisis since World War II. The conflict started as a Danish newspaper published a number of cartoons, some of which portrayed the prophet Muhammad. After the Danish government rejected their requests to censor the media, Danish Islamists distributed these pictures to some senior political and religious figures in the Middle East and requested their support against Denmark. To these pictures, they added a number of more offensive images, never published in any Danish newspaper in order to infuriate Muslims around the world. Muslim clerics, assisted by the governments of Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran caused the region to explode in protest and violent riots, in which 44 people were killed. Danish products were boycotted across the Muslim world; Scandinavian embassies were attacked and set ablaze in Syria, Iran, Lebanon and Indonesia. Islamists promised substantial rewards for anyone who would murder Danish and Norwegian peacekeepers, and Scandinavian UN forces were attacked in Palestine and Afghanistan. The Scandinavian countries and the EU are struggling to find a way to address the issue of radical Islam within their societies, and how to defend liberal democratic values from attacks from its enemies. This process may lead to a redefinition of values, a shift from multiculturalism to an embrace of the democratic western values upon which the European states are based.
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 | 0.000 | 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".