MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054052120 · doi:10.1080/10999940802523885

Rethinking Global Justice: Black Women Resist the Transnational Prison-Industrial Complex

2008· article· en· W2054052120 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julia Sudbury

Bibliographic record

VenueSouls · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonGlobalizationContext (archaeology)Political scienceRestructuringSociologyEconomic JusticeDissentPolitical dissentMass incarcerationGlobal justicePoliticsPolitical economyCriminologyGender studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the role of Black women in the U.S. and Canadian anti-prison movements and argues that anti-prison organizing is a critical site of anti-globalization activism. In the context of domestic economic restructuring, aggressive military interventions abroad and the global spread of neoliberal socio-economic policy agendas, increasing attention has been paid to the multifaceted global justice movement. At the same time, commentators in the U.S. and Canada have noted the underrepresentation of Black participation in anti-globalization activism. By identifying the work that prisons do in absorbing and disenfranchising communities who are surplus to the needs of global capital, and repressing and deflecting dissent to U.S. imperialism, the author reframes anti-prison activism as an overlooked site of global justice organizing. The article identifies six types of antiprison work—human rights advocacy; challenging “post-incarceration sentences”; campaigns for decarceration through legal reform; moratorium activism; abolitionist organizing for alternatives to the prison-industrial complex; and campaigns for the release of political prisoners—and examines Black women's labor as community activists and movement intellectuals in each.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoulsSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207