Bibliographic record
Abstract
The troubled histories of nations are built from the bones of a million damaged children. But what about the nations and children who are stuck in the periphery between troubled and happy, between damaged and healthy? These are the settings that anthropology can thrive in: nations that have both suffered and benefited from colonialism, oppressed groups discriminating against others, and other ambiguous cultural dynamics. In this paper, I want to focus on Finland as a specific nation that serves as a good example of how collective trauma and ambiguous histories can be contested. These contestations are most commonly expressed through minute inequalities between the two main cultural groups in Finland: Finnish and Swedish-speaking Finns. Modern inequalities between different cultural and linguistic groups in and around Finland are expressed through stereotypes and expressions of identity. These stereotypes and identities are often mixed with ambivalent feelings, especially in regard to Finns' relationship with Sweden: the state and people, both historically and in the present. These relationships are based on the hegemonic and non-hegemonic views that Finnish speakers, Fennoswedes, and Swedes hold of each other. Hegemonically, quiet admiration and casual disapproval are common, hence the ambiguity. Non-hegemonically, extreme emotions and fixations are commonly perceived as strange and distasteful; everything must be just right, or lagom in Swedish. In this paper, I focus the discussion on Finnish issues of cultural and linguistic identity while keeping their relationship with the Swedish state and people in mind. Hence, my goal is to answer these questions: How has discrimination shaped Finnish identities? Has it shaped Finnish-speaking versus Swedish-speaking Finnish identities differently? How does a collective memory of oppression affect Finnish peoples' perceptions of others? However, what I ultimately want to answer is what is the source of Finland’s ambiguous historical identity: were Finns victims of ethnic discrimination or is this a narrative produced by historical revisionism?
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".