Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultural heritage (e.g., historic buildings, memorials and museums) has been used to construct and negotiate various identities and meanings in the present, specifically in the context of nation-states. In transforming the past into heritage, however, States may disregard other histories—ones which deviate from the historical narratives they promote. In this paper, I discuss the case of the Heritage Plan, Israel’s official cultural heritage policy. Specifically, by using the discursive approach, I expose and assess cases of silencing competing histories which would challenge the history promoted by the Heritage Plan. My findings suggest that, in addition to privileging Jewish heritage, the Heritage Plan is used as a mechanism for erasing competing, non-Jewish histories. This article presents three case-studies of silencing: the first investigates the Druze heritage center; the second inquires into Israeli heritage practices in the West Bank; the third examines the Castel national heritage site associated with the 1948 war. The analysis of these cases reveals how the Heritage Plan is guided by ethnic and religious factors, whereby heritage assets are not necessarily promoted according to their full historical value, but are instead used to sustain current power structures.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".