New leaders, new dawns? South Africa and Zimbabwe under Cyril Ramaphosa and Emmerson Mnangagwa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Political transitions around the world are generally met with optimism and anticipation that they will usher in progress and a break from an undesirable past. Whether it is a break from a colonial past, armed conflict or any form of autocratic rule, transitions often bring hopes for the future. Agonizingly, these dreams for the future are not always met. What types of transition can states go through? How are the ghosts of the past exorcized? These are among the central questions addressed in New leaders, new dawns? Through diligent contributions, the book offers different perspectives on the current political landscapes in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Weaving together the key moments that have shaped contemporary politics in both countries, this edited volume presents a timely reflection on the prospects of genuine ‘new dawns’. As largely reflected in the book, the optimism and euphoria of transition in both South Africa and Zimbabwe have crumbled. The contributors explore why the hope for these ‘new dawns’ was crushed and whether anything ‘new’ should have been expected to emerge from the unreformed systems from which both countries sought to transition. Through an analysis of business, labour and the liberation movements themselves, the book tackles the key issue of ‘enablers’ and ‘spoilers’ in transitions, and it assesses the potential implications when these two groups are allowed to push their agendas. The volume also provides a key reflection on liberation movements in Africa, exploring their ability to deliver on the promises of independence. Tracing the post-independence economic projects of the former liberation movements, the African National Congress and the Zimbabwe African National Union–Patriotic Front (ZANU–PF), the contributors trace how failed socio-economic policies, corruption and increased autocriticism led to disaffection for the countries’ liberators.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.007 |
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".