Industrial Democracy and Republican Citizenship: Collective Action in Resource Redistribution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The Constitution of India specifies the subject matter of distribution (social goods or the measuring standard of social justice) – consisting of individual freedoms (Part III) and material resources (Part IV) – in furtherance of the social justice agenda. While the Constitution equally safeguards individual freedoms of all citizens, it does not specify a rule – a method – for the redistribution of material resources except for noting that ‘weaker sections’ of the population should receive ‘special care’ as the state seeks to minimise and eliminate inequalities. With this general guidance, the Constitution leaves the specific rule of redistribution to be determined through the political ‘governance’ process. This approach to redistribution means that constitutionally mandated redistribution must take place through direct citizen participation in governance. Participatory democracy, as the third component of the social justice agenda, is particularly appropriate as a basis for a redistributive framework given the nation's exceptionally diverse and large population. Operationalising a specific, singular, functional redistributive method, albeit with contextual modifications, is bound to be difficult, if not impossible, for a country as heterogeneous as India. The Constitution subjects redistributive entitlements to a participatory decision-making process to make room for contextual sensitivity in diverse circumstances. Liberal theories of justice based on individual autonomy widely recognise the significance of this process in shaping the nature of the economy (and polity). The role of democratic deliberation in workplaces has been underscored from the perspectives of workplace democracy and workplace republicanism. Workplace democracy sees participatory decision-making as the right to collective governance of enterprises, and workplace republicanism defines it as a worker's right to contest arbitrary management decisions. It is, thus, argued that democracy in workplaces is important in both conferring control of productive assets on workers and protecting them from the management's caprices. These perspectives emphasise the participatory process operating within the capitalist relations of production based on private contract and property relationships and are thereby consistent with the Indian Constitution's scheme of social justice. As noted earlier (in Chapter 1), the Constitution conceives of worker-citizens as autonomous self-interested actors in market exchanges. The Constitution supports the foundation of this mode of market participation without interfering in the outcome of individual exchanges.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".