Malignant citizenship: race, imperialism, and Puerto Rico-United States entanglements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As inhabitants of a US territory, Puerto Ricans experience their American citizenship under a set of constraints, shaped by processes of colonization, imperialism, and racialization. This paper is concerned with thinking through and developing a theorization of citizenship and life in Puerto Rico, by exploring the history and legislation of US citizenship for inhabitants of the island. It posits that the citizenship held by Puerto Ricans is a kind of disguised malignancy that cannot be understood solely by charting the legal history and formal status of the residents of the island. Instead, the citizenship of Puerto Ricans must be understood as a deeply racialized product of centuries of colonization and imperialism, the consequences of which are not easily shed and cannot be accounted for through liberal political theory. Rather, citizenship actually works to simultaneously cement and invisibilize the ways in which Puerto Rican lives are continuously rendered less valuable and their deaths less grievable. Regarding the citizenship of Puerto Ricans, I argue that racialization and racism are inherent to current United States-Puerto Rico relations. As such, this paper articulates ‘malignant citizenship’ as a term which accounts for the colonial/racial foundations and current iterations of citizenship for Puerto Ricans.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".