Untimely Politics and (Dis)Organization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
H ow should we pose the question of fascism?It permeates many of the discourses that circulate in our political and academic milieus, yet the meaning of fascism, its contemporary form, and how it is to be countered all remain opaque.Does fascism haunt Liberal capitalo-parliamentarism like a nightmare?Or fester as a necrotized wound that cannot heal and inevitably will kill the whole organism?A micropolitics of the phantasm, desire and the body hinges on these images.Part of the difficulty stems, perhaps, from the fact that fascists themselves cannot particularly agree, at least in theoretical terms, on precisely what fascism is.In his book Late Fascism: Race, Capitalism and the Politics of Crisis (London: Verso, 2023), Dr. Alberto Toscano attempts to map out the fascist political terrain through a robust engagement with key critical formulations of fascism and fascist politics.Drawing on critical theory, antifascism, contemporary continental European philosophy, and de-colonial as well as anti-racist scholars and activists, Dr. Toscano identifies several consistent markers and traits that emerge out of the aforementioned analyses.Fascism principally operates as a scavenger politics, a void around which disparate, often contradictory elements circulate, awaiting capture, while invoking images and narratives of heroism, patriarchal strength, purity of race, and the fulfillment of a grand historical mission, ushered in by a people to come, in their realization of an ethno-state.It is fascism's mythic character which holds these diverse elements together, rather than any kind of dialectical relation or analytic synthesis.Its mythic character is essential, speaking to the order of Being and eternity, a cosmic conservatism whose means is the right-wing revolution in which a lost harmony can be restored.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".