Rebuilding Community Solidarity and Pluralism
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book critiques the traditional practice of community organization, change and development, and concludes that the present practice of Community Development (CD) and Social Policy and Planning (SP&P) is no longer capable of meeting the current challenges at the local or national level. The aim of this book is to identify the underlying motivations for the individual aggressive and collective antisocial behaviour that we witness in democratic society today and offer changes to the orientation of the current community change practice in order to build a system that can better address the present needs of society. This work identifies the factors that are moving society toward extremism and authoritarianism focusing particularly on the community level. Given the turmoil in communities that is degrading democracy and leading to authoritarianism today, the issues of Community Solidarity and Pluralism (CS&P) must be attended to before the traditional political, economic, and material issues that are regularly addressed by CD and SP&P practice can become the focus for change and development once again. This book will have widespread appeal to academics, researchers, and postgraduate students throughout the social sciences including sociology, social work, political science, economics, philosophy, environmental studies, and international and community development studies. It is also intended for the general reader who is interested in understanding the authoritarian forces that are attempting to infiltrate the democratic process.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it