Sustaining Oppositional Cultures in `Post-Socialist' Times: A Comparative Study of Three Social Movement Organisations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the efforts of three social-movement organisations in Vancouver, Canada, to advance oppositional cultures in what Nancy Fraser has termed a `post-socialist' age, marked both by neo-liberal hegemony and by the primacy of cultural recognition over material redistribution in the framing of progressive politics. Based on indepth interviews with activists in The Centre (a lesbian-gay-bisexual-transsexual community centre), the BC Coalition of People with Disabilities, and End Legislated Poverty, we compare how these organisations frame and pursue three analytically distinct tasks, which we take to be integral to sustaining counter-hegemony: (1) community-building, in the sense of elaborating collective identities and ethical-political frameworks that are oppositional to dominant conceptions; (2) meeting needs of constituents in ways that empower them and prefigure alternative ways of life; and (3) mobilising and engaging in collective action to press for tangible changes in cultural discourses and social relations. The manner in which each group pursues these three tasks defines the horizons of its political project, including the extent to which the project involves `affirmative' (reformist) or `transformative' (radical) strategies of social change. Counter-hegemonic capacities thus depend in part on specific configurations of practice, which we compare across the three organisations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.071 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| 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".