MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4365150044 · doi:10.1017/s0008423923000136

<i>Response to Paul Gray's review of</i> Revisiting Marx's Critique of Liberalism

2023· article· en· W4365150044 on OpenAlexaff
Igor Shoikhedbrod

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Economy and Marxism
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContent (measure theory)Gray (unit)LiberalismPhilosophySociologyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

administration.Shoikhedbrod also affirms some remarks by the English Marxist historian E. P. Thompson, who argues for the historical significance of struggles for rights and laws.Shoikhedbrod, using his interpretation of Marx's critique of liberalism, provides a more systematic account of the importance of constitutionalism and the rule of law in constraining arbitrary power, providing essential space for contestation in egalitarian struggles, and forming crucial preconditions for the communism that will achieve right and legality in a higher form.The clear strength of Shoikhedbrod's work is his engagement with the legal and juridical aspects of these debates.He offers an important corrective to the dismissive attitude found in some schools of Marxism.Shoikhedbrod also provides persuasive arguments for the enduring importance of rights, whatever the form of the society.If there is a limitation to the book, it is that Shoikhedbrod describes as "orthodox" the interpretation that Marx ultimately dismisses right and legality.This discounts the variety of disagreements between commentators and the different schools of thought in the long-running debates about Marx and justice.For example, Marx asserts, "As far as right is concerned, we with many others have stressed the opposition of communism to right, both political and private, as also in its most general form as the rights of man."Shoikhedbrod contends that this assertion, like other similar assertions by Marx, has often been "taken out of context."But Shoikhedbrod does not provide enough contextual evidence to refute common-sense interpretations of this passage as Marx's plain disavowal of rights as such.(Admittedly, there are other passages where Marx does seem to affirm some notion of rights.)This book is unlikely to persuade many of the commentators who think that Marx regards his critique of capitalism, as well as his theory of communism, as beyond appeals to justice, though Shoikhedbrod might convince some of them that Marxism needs a robust theory of rights and, indeed, that Marx provides some resources for such a theory.Shoikhedbrod offers a spirited critique of liberalism and a good case for why no theory or practice, whether communist or otherwise, can dispense with rights and legality.Although Habermas once called himself "the last Marxist," Shoikhedbrod's book shows that, in our age of rising global inequality, this is not the last we have heard from Marx.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political Science→Same topicPolitical Economy and Marxism→French-language works237,207→