Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is an engagement with the effects of speed in global politics through the lens of what it terms “Brown’s Paradox,” Wendy Brown’s insight that, in a radically accelerating world we “feel a greater political impotence than humans may have felt before, even as we occupy a global order more saturated by human power than ever before.” It begins by discussing the two dominant responses to Brown’s Paradox: the first, the neoliberal embrace and valorization of the uncertainty of an accelerating world, and the second, the reactionary attempt to aggressively (re)secure the foundations of politics and society (in this latter discussion, the article engages with the specific case study of the treatment of Tamil refugees in Canada). The discussion of this latter approach will lead us to the central concept of this article, the idea of a ressentiment against speed. The article will discuss how this ressentiment inhibits our ability to productively respond to the challenges of an accelerating world, while at the same time frequently authorizing policies of violence, marginalization, and exploitation against those constituencies which are already most subject to the conditions of accelerating globalization. Conversely, this understanding of ressentiment against speed will be used to point the way to a politics which, while not resolving the contradiction inherent in Brown’s Paradox, might teach us to live with it—and within it—in a productive and ethical manner.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".