The Coin's Third Side: Illiberal Money and the Sociality of a Community Currency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Classic work in the analysis of money has emphasized the role of the state and the market in giving money its value. This article seeks to build on work that has emphasized the coin's “third side,” in which society serves as a source of monetary value. In so doing, the article builds on the concept of illiberal economies by theorizing what is termed illiberal money . It does so through an analysis of the Comox Valley LETSystem, a community currency developed in British Columbia in the mid‐1980s and intended to promote community resilience in the context of global recession and a local depression. Local exchange trading systems (LETS) are networks that create a unit of account distinct from state money to facilitate the exchange of goods and services between community members. This article suggests that, in contrast to liberal markets, where the goal of exchange is the generation of profit measured in money, the goal of LETS is to strengthen the interdependence of community members on one another by creating credit and inviting others to participate in commercial exchange through what is termed expanding the “credit field.”
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".