Capitalism on a bun: Profitable reconciliations and fast-food chicken sandwiches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simple restaurant menu choices speak to more complex practices and processes. This study uses fast-food chicken sandwiches to understand the way in which capitalism reconciles apparent contradictions profitably. Capitalism has been conceptualized as a system riddled with contradictions, but it is also characterized by synthesis. There can be harmony – and capital accumulation – in juxtaposition. A qualitative analysis of trade journal articles is undertaken. Scholarly sources and journalistic exposés that examine industrial-scale chicken production are also examined. These publications feature information about specific products, restaurant chains and the fast-food industry overall. Thematic analysis and a contrapuntal reading of texts are used to identify patterns across the data. Fast-food chicken sandwiches, it is argued, are the outcome of a series of profitable reconciliations. These reconciliations encompass a series of seemingly contradictory tendencies that exist in tandem and in a manner conducive to making money. The disconnect that many North Americans experience with respect to the production of their food can be counterbalanced with the various connections addressed in this article. There is connection in the context of disconnection. Knowledge of the reconcilable qualities of capitalism enhances understanding of the crucial connections that structure the production, distribution and marketing of chicken sandwiches. Fluency with respect to capitalism and its complexities are helpful to those seeking to create economic value as well as promote more profound societal change. A single fast-food restaurant item can be emblematic of a series of connections. Through products of the commercial hospitality industry, one can achieve a deeper understanding of the functioning of capitalism. Comprehending hospitality contributes to efforts to comprehend the wider world.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".