Private Property Wrongs: Uncovering the Contradictory Articulations of an Hegemonic Ideology*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most effective sources of legitimation for privileged access to the environment and its natural resources comes in the form of hegemonic ideologies, such as private property rights. The concentratiosn of ownership and control over land and natural resources is rarely contested, because to question the rights of an industrial actor's property rights would be to question the ideological premise that private property ownership promotes societal well‐being and progress. The staying power of this and other hegemonic ideologies, however, derives from the ability to keep certain internal contradictions associated with those ideologies concealed. Using recent conceptual work on ideology, this article focuses on recent events in forest politics in northern California, to illustrate the means by which environmental catastrophe has served as a source of vulnerability to the present hegemony of the ideology of private property rights. As with other instances of environmental justice mobilization, this case illustrates how the ability to elucidate contradictions in hegemonic ideologies may provide a more potent avenue for social transformation than attempts to introduce alternative ideologies.
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 | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".