In Search of Ontological Security: Why the Anglo-American Special Relationship Endures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The period following World War II (WWII) marked a significant turning point in Britain’s global standing, characterized by the loss of its empire and the existential anxiety regarding its new role on the world stage. Dean Acheson’s famous quote, “Britain has lost an empire and not yet found a role,” poignantly captures the sense of diminishing power and identity crisis experienced by the Kingdom since 1945. Along with the consequences of WWII, the process of decolonization, coupled with events such as the Suez Crisis, further confirmed Britain’s declining position in the international system, disrupting its established narrative of global power and leaving it in a state of ontological insecurity. This paper, focusing on ontological security studies in international relations, explores the connection between Britain’s ontological insecurity in the new global order after WWII, and the Anglo-American special relationship (AASR) as a response to these anxieties. In this context, the suggested theoretical framework promises to address the concepts of narrative identity and existential anxiety and their respective contributions to understanding the underlying factors in explaining the emergence and stability of the AASR.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".