Will Kymlicka’s Liberal Theory of Multiculturalism : A case study of Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Inuit people in Greenland are internationally recognized as indigenous. They, therefore, have been granted protective measures, such as self-government rights in 2009. However, some scholars have started to question whether protective measures are still a necessity because of their increased autonomy rights. To contest this questioning, this paper examines the contemporary political discourse in Greenland regarding the Inuit people’s emphasis on their cultural heritage, ongoing identity issues, and aspirations of independence, in the light of Will Kymlicka’s liberal theory of multiculturalism. The paper concludes that the Inuit people in Greenland, to a large extent, apply to Kymlicka’s theory regarding his criteria of national minorities and the importance of belonging to a societal culture. However, the study also finds that his theory is limited in protecting potential sub-cultures and lacks nuances about secessionist thoughts among indigenous groups. The results underline the importance of continuingly protect indigenous peoples in Greenland and suggests considering additional measures to other minorities on the island.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".