Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The crisis of the liberal international order (LIO) is the dominant narrative of our time. It pervades scholarship, journalism and policy discussion, influencing the ways we see contemporary global tensions, future possibilities and political choices. This article argues that the current crisis is not simply a crisis of the LIO, but of the CIO—the conservative international order. The postwar order was not constructed by liberals alone. It was also built by conservative governments, politicians and intellectuals who were crucial parts of the domestic and international accommodations and alliances underpinning the postwar order. Today's crisis is to a large degree the result of the implosion that has transformed conservatism from a supporter of the LIO to one of its most powerful opponents. While this article focuses on the United States, the implications of the crisis of the CIO extend beyond America and require a fundamental rethinking of the conventional International Relations view of liberalism and the development of the LIO. The influence of the anti-liberal forces in American conservatism is supported by their transnational connections, allowing for powerful alliances that undermine mainstream conservatism and its historical support for the LIO. The crisis of the CIO, in short, is global.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".