ALBA: A decolonial delinking performance towards (western) modernity – An <i>alternative to development</i> project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout the 20th century, ideological deficiency and disunity of the Third World have resulted in the principles of Bandung and South-South cooperation not fulfilling their historical decolonial objective. This paper seeks to identify The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) as an organization that has developed not only unity amongst its participants in opposing neoliberal (development) logic, but has successfully performed and implemented an alternative decolonial epistemology that seeks to dismantle the colonial matrix sustained by colonial subjects through local and global solidarities. ALBA is analyzed and conceptualized using concepts elaborated by decolonial scholars of the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region. As a decolonial delinking performance, ALBA proposes an alternative to development project that embodies the spirit of Bandung and principles of South-South Cooperation thereby counterploting the supposed belief that only (western) knowledge systems lead to economic and social development. This (decolonial performance) is noticed in ALBA’s theoretical framework which establishes an alternative regional development project contra the Washington consensus and more explicitly the ethos of Liberal-Capitalism. The last section highlights the epistemological differences between the BRICS and ALBA with the former being identified as de-westernized delinking, and the latter decolonial delinking.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".