The 2011 International Year for People of African Descent (IYPAD): The paradox of colonized invisibility within the promise of mainstream visibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The United Nations declared that 2011 be recognized as the “International Year for People of African Descent” (IYPAD). This year marks the tenth anniversary of the World Conference Against Racism (often referred to as the Durban Conference), in which a resolution was approved stating that slavery and the colonization that sustained it were crimes against humanity. The outcome for this International Year is disappointing, if not shocking, at several levels, in terms of mediatisation, appropriation, program content, educational connection, and, significantly, any tangible impact in relation to people of African descent (PAD). The IYPAD was largely ignored and trivialized at the local, regional and national levels in almost all of the countries concerned. Following the hegemonic leadership of the United States, a number of nations proceeded to convert this International Year, which sought to underscore and engage all peoples in debates, actions and measures that could formally acknowledge historic injustices in relation to people of African descent, into the paradox of willingly rendering the focus of the Year invisible. Within this context of banalization of the IYPAD, this study, within an anti-colonial perspective, seeks to examine the international dynamic and related motives that characterize the significance of this problematic. Our analysis has led to three central interpretations: i) Africa, and all related and inter-connected questions, remain on the periphery of the world’s politics, economics and international political economy; ii) the competition between nations for the recognition of human history remains a political and economic affair, and Africa and her descendants are not accorded a seat at the same table as the colonizing forces; and iii) the IYPAD declaration, ensconced in the yolk of an empathetic conscience by some and bad faith by others, can be seen as the residue of colonization, in which the degree of invisibility of people of African descent is still tethered to the heart-beat of colonizing nations and their proxy consorts, which are economically coerced and subjugated.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".