Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era where internationalism is on the retreat in the Western world, a modified version of Rosa Luxemburg’s thinking about internationalism can serve as a useful guide for those concerned about relations between peoples in different countries. Luxemburg contributes to existing internationalist, cosmopolitan and transnational approaches by offering a unique set of answers to questions about the appropriate ethics, political project and tools to be adopted. Her ethical stance of the universal worth of all people was informed both by a deep sense of empathy and her theoretical analysis of capitalism. She believed that citizens had a duty to hold their governments accountable for foreign policy and that the world formed a single system and community. The political project was one of radical transformation and equality. European nations faced the option of transforming into more egalitarian and peaceful societies or descending into barbarism. Central to this transformation was a constant struggle against militarism and imperialism. Key tools for transformation included mass mobilisation, vibrant democratic debate and revolutionary reform of the political system. Problematic aspects of Luxemburg’s internationalism that require revision include her insensitivity to the importance of national identity and Eurocentrism.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".