MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systemic Discrimination of the Russian Orthodox Church in European Countries

2023· article· en· W4387165895 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vladimir Nikolaevich Rogatin

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthodoxia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Social Development in Ukraine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianHuman rightsPolitical scienceSanctionsPoliticsAmnestyParliamentEuropean unionLawInternational tradeBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines and analyzes the discriminatory processes in Ukraine against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the discriminatory processes in the European Union countries against the Russian Orthodox Church. It specifi es the major publications highlighting the facts of discrimination against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. The article also mentions the documents of the European Parliament, which have been used as the justifi cation for restricting the activity of the Russian Orthodox Church. These documents have become an aid for the introduction of unprecedented targeted sanctions against Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and all Russia by countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia. Such gross interference by politicians in the activity of Orthodox churches is becoming the norm of political life in countries such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, as evidenced by the actions taken by the politicians of these countries and mentioned in the article. Moreover, the article fi gures out the understanding of the crisis in the international human rights movement with regard to rights and freedoms of religious organizations. The article highlights cases when Ukrainian human rights defenders became authors of anti-church laws, and the well-known Amnesty International human rights organization apologized for their report on the alleged war crimes by the Zelensky’s regime. Double standards in the assessment of off ense seriousness in Ukraine are clearly illustrated by the example of the fi rst three reports of the Monitoring Mission that was deployed in Ukraine in March 2014 by the Off ice of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. This mission was represented by more than 30 employees in fi ve Ukrainian cities: Kyiv, Donetsk, Odessa, Kharkiv and Lviv. These reports included a section dedicated to the observance of rights and freedoms of religious organizations in Ukraine. The article mentions the incidents recorded by the Monitoring Mission and the facts of discrimination against clerics and members of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church highlighted in mass media. It is noted that the Monitoring Mission recorded mainly cases of discrimination against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church and other religious organizations. Violations of rights and freedoms of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church were not only ignored, but sometimes its activity was characterized in documents as “aggressive”.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthodoxiaSame topicEducation and Social Development in UkraineFrench-language works237,207