Explaining the Causes of the Expansion of Populism in the World (Case Study: Iran)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a descriptive research method, this study analyzes the causes of the expansion of populism in the world, with a specific focus on Iran. The results indicate that the hypothesis is confirmed, suggesting that class disparity and the unequal distribution of wealth provide the groundwork for the emergence of populism in developing countries, including Iran. In this regard, populism, meaning mass-oriented politics or demagoguery, is a strategy of advocating for or pretending to advocate for the rights and interests of the general public against elites. Political populism, in essence, involves the instrumentalization of the people to achieve political objectives, posing a risk to Iran given its current economic and political conditions. Populism is a political doctrine and strategy that involves supporting or appearing to support the rights and interests of the general public against elite groups. In the twentieth century, most "populist" movements were associated with Latin America and India. However, since the 1980s, such movements have also achieved varying degrees of success in countries such as Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, and the United States. Class disparity and the unequal distribution of wealth have contributed to the formation of populist governments and even social movements in developing countries, including Iran. Furthermore, capitalist and advanced societies in Europe and the United States have witnessed the emergence and rapid expansion of populism in recent years, which, to some extent, represents a response to the declining living standards of the working class and the tensions between modernity and democratic institutions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".