Bibliographic record
Abstract
In its globalized deployment, imperialism was always conjugated in the plural, since its inception in the sixteenth century until 1945. The conflict of imperial powers, permanent and often violent, has in fact occupied a decisive place in the transformation of the world into an arena of class struggle, through which the fundamental contradictions of capitalism are expressed. Moreover, social struggles and imperial conflicts are closely articulated. It is this articulation that determines the course of really existing capitalism. The Second World War should be interpreted as eventuating in a major transformation with regard to the forms of imperialism: the multiplicity of imperialism in permanent conflict was substituted by a collective form of imperialism, combining the centres of the world capitalist system (simply put, the ‘triad’: the US and its external Canadian province, the EU, and Japan). This new form of imperialist expansion went through various phases of development, but has persisted to the present. The hegemonic role of the US must be located within this perspective. General opinion has it that US military power only constitutes the tip of the iceberg, extending the country’s superiority in all areas, notably economic, but even political and cultural. In this light, the American establishment has perfectly understood that, in the pursuit of its hegemony, it has two decisive advantages over its EU and Japanese competitors: control over the natural resources of the globe, and military monopoly. Defeating the US ruling class project is therefore the condition for any significant alternative global system favourable to social and international justice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".