Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper synthesizes the political economy of neoliberal elite democracy as a general trend and marks out its concrete historical manifestation in one of its more committed followers, Ecuador, from 1981 to 2007. As the American continent turned toward democracy, it also turned to neoliberal reforms. The neoliberal reforms espoused were performed under the theory of the primacy of personal security and property rights, the securement of which would lead to economic growth, leading to the benefit of society as a whole. The actual policies implemented, however, violated the personal security and property rights of many, while increasing inequality and promoting slow growth. A democracy that rules by formal elections to accumulate capital in elites without regard to truth and justice is an elite democracy. Elite democracy was the chosen politics of neoliberalism and neoliberalism was the chose economics of elite democracy. This paper provides a synthetic panoramic view of the history of the rise and life of neoliberalism and elite democracy in Ecuador, starting with the death of Ecuador’s first president of its current democratic era, continuing with the measures that lead to the steep accumulation of public debt for the gain of a few in the 1980’s, and the deregulation of the banking sector and transfer of its losses to the public in the 1990’s and the beginning of the Century, while growth lagged but inequality and political instability accentuated.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".