Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter four critically reviews the anti-capitalist literature on the commons, comprising of various interpretations of Marx’s work, among others. The first section investigates the relation of the political and the common in a broad spectrum of continental political philosophy, including ‘post-hegemony’ notably Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe and the autonomous Marxist tradition (Michael Hardt and Toni Negri) in the context of Alexandros Kioupkiolis’s critique who points to the crowding out of the self-instituting power of the people in several Marxist and post-Marxist interpretations of the common. The second section focuses on the work of Pierre Dardot and Christian Laval who have reintroduced the self-instituting power of the people in political discourse as the essential concept of ‘the common’. The third section illustrates a more concrete version of the common, articulated in the Katharine Gibson and Julie Graham’s work, who sketch out the philosophical and empirical preconditions of a community economy. The fourth section deals with the concept of the common as the self-instituting power of the people to introduce variants of autonomous Marxism, ranging from post-capitalism to anti-capitalism. Lastly, the fifth section examines the conception of the common in the context of autonomous and classical Marxist views . Authors discussed include Nick Dyer-Witheford, Massimo De Angelis, George Caffentzis, Silvia Federici, Slavoj Žižek, Jodi Dean, David Harvey, Paul Mason and Christian Fuchs. The author concludes that a set of policies could be integrated into a holistic, post-hegemonic strategy for a post-capitalist, commons-orientated transition drawing also on some reformist perspectives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".