Notas sobre o debate acerca dos limites históricos do capital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A dinâmica da acumulacao de capital tem mudado durante as ultimas decadas, o que ensejou a discussao sobre as perspectivas do capitalismo contemporâneo que, no mainstream economicos, produziu a tese da “estagnacao secular”, e, no campo da critica da economia politica, resultou nas analises que afirmam os limites historicos da forma capital. O proposito desse artigo e apresentar um panorama das teorizacoes representativas do marxismo que afirmam esses limites, mostrando que muitas de suas deficiencias poderiam ser resolvidas com uma consideracao rigorosa da madura critica marxiana da economia politica. Longe da intensao de apresentar toda a heterogeneidade e complexidade dessas teorias, concentramos nossa apresentacao, de um lado, nas bem conhecidas contribuicoes para o campo (tais como Istvan Meszaros, Robert Kurz, Francois Chesnais e David Harvey). Por outro lado, investigamos teorias que nao tem sido traduzidas para o portugues e/ou sao menos conhecidas no debate marxista brasileiro (tais como Andrew Kliman, Michel Roberts, Esteban Maito, Michel Husson et.al. e Pierre Dardot & Christian Laval).
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".