Legitimation as Political Practice: Crafting Everyday Authority in Tanzania. By Kathy Dodworth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. 256p. $99.99 cloth.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
they rig the electoral process to stay in power" (p.209, emphasis in the original); Collins would be asked to respond.In turn, I would expect Collins to ask Carrión why he was not more concerned about the power of traditional Andean elites and whether or not he agreed that, at times, some rules had to be broken to achieve inclusion.There are issues that I would have liked each author to address in greater detail.While Carrión builds an apt and thoughtful classification of the "varieties of populism"-as mentioned, from "constrained populism" in Colombia to "dominant-authoritarian populism" in Venezuela-he does not develop an argument about exactly why opposition institutions had the strength to constrain Uribe in Colombia but not in the other countries.In Carrión's defense, it is difficult to build an argument upon only one case of "constraint" and five cases in all, and his book thoroughly describes the institutional struggles in the five countries, but additional effort on this front would be welcome.While Collins highlights the agency of political leaders -Morales's greater solidarity with indigenous organizations than Correa's-as key to the greater longevity of Morales's party in Bolivia, she does not incorporate structural differences between the two countries into her argument.Collins points out that the size of the indigenous population is much larger in Bolivia than in Ecuador, but she does not elaborate on the impact of this demographic fact for Morales and Correa.Was Morales's commitment to Bolivia's indigenous organizations greater than Correa's, in part, because indigenous peoples composed more than half of Bolivia's population but only perhaps 20% of Ecuador's?In addition, throughout, Collins criticizes neoliberalism and the gradual embrace of extractive projects by both Morales and Correa, but (like most scholars) does not propose an alternative path to economic growth in the two countries.Is it possible that Correa was correct that, at least in the short term, he had few options other than the extraction of mineral and oil resources and that the challenge for Ecuador was to secure as many gains among as wide a swath of the population as possible (pp.174-80)?But these are quibbles.These two books significantly advance our knowledge about the peril and the potential of populism in the Andes.Both are theoretically stimulating and empirically very rich.And they are even more valuable in conjunction with each other.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".