About a Will to Power: Post-cold War Conflicts and the Politics of Knowledge Production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a critical interrogation of the dominant interpretations of the post-cold war conflicts in order to demonstrate their political nature and how they internalised the causes of conflicts. By internalisation, I refer to the move to locate the causes of conflicts in internal sources. It argues that the region of emergence of the dominant interpretations of conflicts—the so-called new wars— and the internalisation of their causes is the attempt by the West to ideologically suppress or discredit third world anticolonial solidarity and worldmaking. To make this argument, the paper pays specific attention to the broader historical contexts and structural conditions within which internalisation emerged, which it argues are significant for understanding not only the political nature of the dominant interpretations of conflicts, but also the material forces and social processes that informed their production and circulation. In other words, that the framing of the post-cold war conflicts and the internalisation of their causes were never innocent or impartial acts of knowledge production, but political, ideological, and temporal acts linked to power, interests, and specific agenda.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".