Dependency, White Privilege, and Transnational Hegemonic Reconfiguration: Investigating Systems of Power and Identity Privilege in The Bahamas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
White cultural hegemony has been used as a determinant of identity privilege in The Bahamas since the beginning of British colonialism. This ideal justifies and confers the dominance of whiteness while also including a moral responsibility to enforce the racial hierarchy as a part of a "global cognitive dysfunction" (Mills 18) that sees non-white actors as intrinsically lesser; an understanding Charles Mills argues is needed to uphold a racialized social contract. This “grammar of racial difference” inculcates the need for whiteness to act as savior through the subjugation and cultural integration of the “other” (Mahmud). However, beyond its role as a dysfunction, this conception of a moral obligation—or colloquially, a ‘white savior complex’—guides understandings of why colonial leaders forged hegemonic relationships with the U.S. despite the country’s apparent intent to achieve independence. These relationships were a strategic part of a colonial-savior complex and adherence to a global system that values 'whiteness.' This paper suggests that despite independence, The Bahamas remains subjected to the dependency role under a system of white privilege, resulting from colonial agreements made with the United States, and multi-national agencies, and regulatory bodies that enforce a hegemonic reconstruction of influence. Ergo, the cultural hegemony of the United States as an industrialized giant merely filled the void that the British rule left behind.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".