MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1594729665

Confronting Colonialism and Racism Fanon and Gandhi

2007· article· en· W1594729665 on OpenAlexaff
Hira Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman architecture · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian History and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismRacismModernityPostcolonialism (international relations)Gender studiesPoliticsEmancipationGlobalizationSociologyContext (archaeology)Political scienceHistoryLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fanon and Gandhi were products of colonial social formations, confronting the vio- lence of racism embedded in colonial domination and control by seeking emancipation through political action. This article explores the trajectory of Gandhi's political engagement to empower the Asian laboring and trading classes, racially discriminated and politically marginalized by the imperial-colonial set up in South Africa from the 1890s to the 1910s. The article compares the commonalities and differences in the experiences of colonialism and racism by Gandhi and Fanon in their respective historical contexts as reflected in their political tactics and strategies informed by their respective understandings and cultural interpretations of the modernity of the west—the colonizer—in relation to the east (albeit, non-western world)—the colonized. The arti- cle highlights the significance of a comparative account of colonized people's resistance to the racialized discourse and intercourse of colonialism-imperialism and its particular urgency in the current context of globalization shrouded in the mission of democratization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.020
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman architectureSame topicIndian History and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207