Among Uncertainty, Fear and Reluctance to Change: The Basis of the ‘Rejection’ to the New Constitution in Chile’s Big Business Before the Social Outbreak of 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The institutional response to the social outbreak of 18/O in Chile was the National Referendum for a new Constitution, which had an overwhelming result in favor of approving the constitutional change. However, within the minority group that voted against the change, there is part of the large Chilean business community. This article seeks to show the foundations of the main business leaders of two employers' organizations in Chile: the National Society of Agriculture and the Sociedad de Fomento Fabril, who rejected the idea of a new Constitution years before the social outbreak, as a result of the Constitutional Process promoted between 2015 and 2016 by the government of former President Michelle Bachelet. From 40 interviews with members of the business elite, it is concluded that uncertainty, fear and aversion support this conservative stance with a complex base, marked by its institutional trust and fear of the creation of a new political order. The analysis is interesting, because possibly the magnitude of the social outbreak and its consequences, managed to change the public positioning of some business leaders.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".