Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ‘Anglosphere’ refers to a grouping of English-speaking states, nations and societies united by the language, values and institutions associated with the historical experience of England/Britain. After being introduced in 1999–2000 at two conferences convened by the Hudson Institute, the idea of the Anglosphere has become increasingly popular with various Anglophiles and especially with Anglo-American conservatives and neoconservatives. After a brief inquiry into the broader conceptual and historical foundations of this neologism, this article considers some ways in which the Anglosphere relates to the research programme on global governance in the field of international relations (IR). Using ‘liberal imperialism’ as a theoretical starting point, the article evaluates the Anglosphere as a tool for promoting greater attention to the role of race and racism in the emergence of the structure and processes of contemporary global governance. For all its political, logical and other ambiguities, when approached as an arena of critical analysis, an Anglosphere perspective can indeed help us comprehend the development and general patterns of the racialized world order. For that reason alone, Anglobal governance should be worthy of study in IR.
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 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".