MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410247856 · doi:10.1111/polp.70032

Is the <scp>US</scp> Moving Toward Autocracy? A Critical Assessment

2025· article· en· W4410247856 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics &amp Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersKonrad-Adenauer-Stiftung
KeywordsAutocracyComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Using the theory of incremental autocratization, I illustrate in this commentary that recent developments in the United States perfectly align with this theory. In the analytical framework I use, incremental autocratization consists of six distinct step: (1) societal turmoil, (2) a proposition of radical change, (3) an electoral victory as point of departure, (4) the reconfiguration of the balance of power as well as the neutralization of checks and balances (5) securing power, and (6) limiting civil rights. I argue that as of March 2025, we are at stage 4. Mass firing in the bureaucracy, the excessive use of illegal or semi‐illegal executive orders, infringements of minority rights, attacks on academic freedom and the press, imperialism, and trade wars are all signs that Donald Trump is trying to crack down on the institutions and procedures of democracies. Of course, it is too early to say if this tendencies will succeed, but there is all reason for concern, even more so because Donald Trump has started to think about “loopholes” to stay in power beyond 2029, and has started to limit civil rights of some citizens residents.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it