Foreign villains and home-grown heroes, a critical geopolitical re-reading of a neo-liberal text from The Atlantic Monthly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a critical analysis of neo-liberal discourses of international migration. Through a close reading of the text "Must it be the West against the Rest?", I challenge the authors' representation of refugee/migrants as a pre-eminent geopolitical threat to 'global order' in the post-Cold War period. I employ a critical geopolitical approach to problematise this identification of a 'new' antagonism not as an objective description of reality, but as part of powerful discursive representational practices that produce exclusion. I argue that these sorts of explanations are less about refugees/migrants and the 'reality' of international migration, and more about the need to secure Western hegemony and its idealised way of life. One means to resist the exclusions in neo-liberal texts is to resist the narrow conceptual categories that they force upon their readers, and to reject the exclusive 'we' that is created for 'us' in these texts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".