After Postmaterialism: An Essay on China, Russia and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The postmaterialist thesis makes two main claims. First, over time, rising affluence enables many people to substantially satisfy their need for security and economic sustenance, allowing them to focus on pursuing personal autonomy and self-expression. Second, at a given time, younger people, individuals in higher socio-economic positions and wealthier societies tend to be more postmaterialistic than are older people, individuals in lower socio-economic positions and poorer societies. Cursory analysis of American, Chinese and Russian survey data since the late 1980s demonstrates that some of these generalizations are difficult to sustain. While postmaterialism may have been on the rise in some countries in the last decades of the 20th century, it seems now to be a waning force among major world powers, giving way to increasing nationalism and xenophobia. The absence in postmaterialist theory of an adequate explanation for this trend suggests the need to pay more attention to the causes of alternative development paths. Two such causes are outlined in this essay: intensifying geopolitical rivalries and growing economic inequality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".