Geopolitical dilemmas of the Anglosphere: identity and strategy in the (Il)liberal West
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mid-way through the 2020s the Anglosphere finds itself at a point of inflection. Geopolitics understood through the frames of the Anglosphere's and the West's stated liberalism would suggest a confrontation with Russia, as well as with an authoritarian China. Yet the success of radical right ideas across the West is drawing the concept of Anglosphere closer to the illiberal vision of the world articulated from the Trump White House and the Kremlin, as the centre-right of politics in Anglophone countries bends to the ideological pull of MAGA. It is not clear which Anglosphere will emerge out of this current moment of geostratic tensions and realignments: the 'AUKUS Anglosphere' of Australia, the UK and the US designed to contain China; the 'CANZUK Anglosphere' of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK forged in the confrontation against Russia in Ukraine; or the Russophilic 'MAGA Anglosphere' seemingly aligned with the transnational radical right agenda seeking a multipolar world order and domestic illiberalism. By drawing on constructivist analyses, the articles in this Special Issue show, the dilemma facing the Anglosphere as both an idea and as an actor in IR, is conceptual and political as much as it is geostrategic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".