MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984727382 · doi:10.1177/0038038514539207

Debt, Neoliberalism and Crisis: Interview with Maurizio Lazzarato on the Indebted Condition

2014· article· en· W1984727382 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Charbonneau, Magnus Paulsen Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Economy and Marxism
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeoliberalism (international relations)CreditorSociologyDebtorSubjectivityDebtEconomicsPower (physics)Welfare stateCapitalismFordismNeoclassical economicsPolitical economyEconomyLawFinancePolitical sciencePoliticsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following presents parts of an interview conducted with Maurizio Lazzarato discussing his 2012 book, The Making of the Indebted Man . In this interview, Lazzarato first elaborates on his theoretical inspirations. Drawing on the work of Deleuze and Guattari in order to connect Nietzsche and Marx, he develops a theory of debt suggesting that the power of credit, central to neoliberalism, requires the construction of an indebted subjectivity. Producing a responsible, guilty and thus hindered subject, this condition involves individuals and societies facing an infinite social debt. According to Lazzarato, post-Fordism should be understood through the ascending influence of neoliberalism, as the state has retroceded its power of money creation to private creditors. Through this process, the relation between capital and labour has been transcended by the creditor–debtor relationship. In the economy of indebtedness, the welfare state is transformed into an inverted Keynesian redistribution system that allows for wealth transfers from non-owners towards owners.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations25
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociologySame topicPolitical Economy and MarxismFrench-language works237,207