<i>The Sublime Perversion of Capital: Marxist Theory and the Politics of History in Modern Japan</i> . By Gavin Walker.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First and foremost, this book aims “to understand and revisit the relevance of Marxist theory to the historical present” (4), centering on the work of the Japanese economist Uno Kozo (1897–1977), who is known for his original, heterodox reading of Karl Marx’s Capital. The so-called Uno School has been one of the major forces in the study of economics in Japan and, in recent years, more and more scholars outside the country have drawn attention to his work. Walker’s book discusses Uno’s work in relation to the debate on Japanese capitalism that took place during the late 1920s and early 1930s. This debate pitted the so-called Kōza (Lectures) faction against the Rōnō (Labor-Farmer) faction and was primarily concerned with the disparity in socioeconomic and cultural development between the city and the countryside. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the debate. Representing the official line of the Japanese Communist Party and the Comintern, the Kōza faction considered capitalism in Japan unique since it was based on feudal remnants. In contrast, the Rōnō faction argued that the country’s capitalist development was following the general path laid out by historical materialism and denied the specific theoretical and political significance of the agrarian problem.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".