MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108323995 · doi:10.18740/s4989t

The Differing Revolutionary Positions of Gramsci and Trotsky in Relation to Classical Marxism, the Peasantry, and the Majority World

2008· article· en· W2108323995 on OpenAlexaffvenue
James J. Brittain

Bibliographic record

VenueSocialist studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical theory and Gramsci
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitalismMarxist philosophyCapitalist mode of productionPoliticsRelation (database)World-systemSociologyPolitical economyClass conflictNeoclassical economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While differing arguments are found within the discipline, the principal denominator uniting theories of Marxist revolution is that organized class-based struggle can consequentially result in a more equitable society, one which surpasses a capitalist mode of production. Augmenting Marx's work on the growing realities of the competitive capitalist system, Lenin highlighted that as capitalism expands it increasingly becomes a model not of competing capitalist producers but one of centralized economic monopolies within global society. With this political economic shift in global capitalism, Gramsci and Trotsky penned differing theoretical responses toward the importance of revolutionary tactics in an age of imperialism. It is in this vein that this article delves into the varied responses of permanent revolution and war of position/manoeuvre, while illustrating which theory most effectively demonstrates the capacity and emancipatory efforts of peoples located in countries outside of the imperial nations (i.e. the majority world).

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)0.006
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.058
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocialist studiesSame topicPolitical theory and GramsciFrench-language works237,207