Estado e exceção econômica na periferia: acumulação primitiva e outras formas de expropriação do comum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article seeks to demonstrate the permanence of the framework of economic exception on the periphery of capitalism, as well as the instrumentalization of State and Law to legitimize the expropriation of the “common”. It tries to understand, therefore, the actuality of concepts such as “primitive accumulation”, “formal subsumption” and “real subsumption” as appropriate analytical tools for criticizing the expropriation of social wealth, the deepening of the peripheral condition of countries like Brazil, and how the legal form and the political form are functional to this project of “plundering” that is located at the core of “neoliberal rationality” (Dardot, Laval). The discussions undertaken do not manifest automatic adherence to the authors used, but seek to build the argument presented from a critical dialogue with texts by Antonio Negri, Michael Hardt, Laura Nader, Ugo Mattei and, in Brazil, mainly, Leda Paulani, Paulo Arantes, Gilberto Bercovici and Francisco de Oliveira. The chosen method is dialectical materialism, which was applied to the bibliographic survey and to the tying of concepts directed to the critique of the contemporary economic exception. The usurpation of the commons is a global phenomenon, but one that evidently has a greater incidence outside the capitalist center. This justifies the focus given to Brazil as a locus for observing the phenomenon.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".