MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184954811 · doi:10.51357/cs.v16i1.148

The COVID-19 Pandemic: On the Everyday Mechanisms of Social Murder

2021· article· en· W3184954811 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth McGibbon

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Studies An International and Interdisciplinary Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionRealmCriminologyStereotype (UML)Prejudice (legal term)SociologyPandemicSocial psychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political sciencePsychologyLawPoliticsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this commentary is to explore and reflect upon some of the everyday normalized mechanisms of social murder operating in the Covid-19 pandemic. Although social murder is activated in a complex and hidden process, it is nonetheless put in place by actual policymakers in the course of their actual everyday lives. Drawing on Engels’ original writings about social murder, and the work of contemporary authors such as Chernomas and Hudson, Birn, Grover, and Hodkinson, I explore the relentlessness of social murder – a deeply entrenched historical repetition of lethal, public policy-induced disease and illness. Using the cycle of oppression (stereotype, prejudice, discrimination, oppression) I illustrate in more granular detail how some of these mechanisms play themselves out in the social murder of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although oppression and social murder are somewhat abstract concepts, they are (re)envisioned and (re)enacted in the material world we live in, by actual people, especially those who operate in the public policy realm. I conclude with Scambler’s greedy bastards hypothesis (GBH), underscoring that the perpetrators are known, as are the policy-based solutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.155
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Studies An International and Interdisciplinary JournalSame topicWildlife Conservation and Criminology AnalysesFrench-language works237,207