MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412762798 · doi:10.1080/00083968.2025.2490564

Local histories, national ambitions, and the shadow of the Cold War: articulating opposition in Angola and Mozambique

2025· article· en· W4412762798 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Justin Pearce

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsOpposition (politics)Cold warShadow (psychology)Political scienceEconomic historyPolitical economyHistoryGeographySociologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Angola and Mozambique, the long-time ruling parties Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) and Mozambique Liberation Front (Frelimo) have survived the transition from Leninist-inspired one-party states to become multiparty democracies. The opposition role has been filled by National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) and the Mozambican National Resistance Movement (Renamo), respectively, successors to regionally based insurgent movements positioned as anti-communist during the Cold War. This article considers how the opposition parties articulate appeals to distinct constituencies. In their provincial heartlands they claim a history of nationalist anticolonial struggle and of defending an inclusive vision of nationhood against a centralising state. In the capital cities they address a cross-class constituency including the poor, middle class and intellectual elite. To all, the message is one of opposition to authoritarianism, which they present as the legacy of socialist rule. What allows the articulation of regional with national and liberal with populist claims is the parties’ roots in liberation struggles and their later alignment in Cold War-era civil conflicts.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africainesSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207