Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinton and Blair have extolled a Third Way policy which is supposed to go beyond the policies of the present world where the `First Way' (capitalism) rules and the Second (socialism) failed. Clinton's Third Way ennumerated positive changes in theory, such as universal health care, equity in the tax code, national education standards and preschool. But in practice, the third way has only resulted in `welfare reform' and a free-trade pact with Mexico and Canada. Blair's policies for the UK mirrored those of the US, and other countries are now talking of the Third Way as a progressive advance. In fact the so-called Third Way, as presently conceived, serves the ends of multinational capital. I show this by reworking Marx's labour theory of value. This article explains the tension between the speed of production and the way that the reproduction of natural resources, including labour-power, cannot keep pace with that speed. Capital does not want to wait for natural resources and labour-power to regenerate, and therefore finds them by going further afield. Hence the endorsement of free trade pacts and globalization by the Third Way, and proposed multilateral agreements (such as the multilateral agreement on investment, or MAI). Under the Third Way, space for the expansion of corporations is doing well, while time for the generational reproduction of people is faring badly with legislation restricting welfare and other social provisions. I conclude that a real Third Way would have to be based on small business, and allow for the reproduction time of natural resources and labour-power.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.011 |
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".