Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years the rise of far-right politics in North America and Europe has called into question the stability and cohesion of the so-called liberal international order. Scholars and commentators have argued that this swelling configuration of reactionary social forces threatens the future of western hegemony within a 21st century global capitalism. This essay reflects on the role of transnational organizations, organic intellectuals and elite actors in shaping the modern far-right movement. This essay will discuss the rise of a transnational ideology of the contemporary far-right which I call ‘far-right civilizationism’. This far-right ‘hegemonic project’ seeks to challenge the centrist global governance model of ‘neoliberal cosmopolitanism’, which has been dominant in the West since the end of the Cold War. The reactionary worldview of far-right civilizationism represents an alternative elite grand strategy for world order, purposed to refurbish elite hegemony during a period of profound structural crisis.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".