Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Postcolonial Studies as a field of academic enquiry has often neglected the writings of Marxist anti-colonial writers in the insurgent national liberation movements. This essay analyzes the strategic ideas of anti-colonial resistance by focusing on negritude as ethnic identity in writings by Aime Cesaire and Leopold Senghor and national culture in Amilcar Cabral and Frantz Fanon. It argues that these Marxist anti-colonial writers’ strategies of resistance are mainly based upon a relatively unproblematized notion of ethnic or national identity, which, though suspicious of essentialist politics of identity, is in accordance with the political urgency of decolonization for national independence in the historical context. Key Words: Resistance; Negritude; National culture; Cesaire; Senghor; Cabral; FanonResume: Les etudes de post-colonial comme un champ de la recherche academique a souvent neglige les ecrits des auteurs marxistes d’anti-colonial dans la rebelle contre les mouvements de liberation nationale. Cet essai analyse les idees strategiques de la resistance anti-coloniale en se concentrant sur la negritude que l'identite ethnique dans les ecrits par Aime Cesaire et Leopold Senghor et de la culture nationale dans Amilcar Cabral et Frantz Fanon. Il fait valoir que les strategies de lutte ces ecrivain marxistes anti-coloniale sont principalement basees sur une notion relativement pas encore problematise d’ethnique ou d’identite nationales identite ethnique, qui, bien les essentialiste politique de l'identite suspicions, est conforme avec l’accordance avec l'urgence politique de la decolonisation pour l'independance nationale dans le contexte historique. Mots cles: Resistance; Negritude; La culture nationale; Cesaire; Senghor; Cabral; Fanon
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".