<p>Why do scientists from (semi)peripheral countries remain invisible to their international peers? Various explanations have been offered for this phenomenon, including the scarcity of research resources, brain drain, symbolic violence by the global Anglo-American academic establishment, and dependency rooted in an asymmetric division of academic labor. This paper elaborates on the latter approach, suggesting that global invisibility in the social sciences is a result of an inward orientation by scholars from peripheral countries, the most resourceful of whom exploit opportunities created by structural holes (Burt) that separate their local audiences from their global peers. Global invisibility is an unintended consequence of the focus on the intellectual import of theories and localized replications of empirical studies conducted in the West. This focus is a consequence of such forms of work being the most economically and morally rewarding at the periphery. The paper illustrates this thesis with the empirical example of sociology in Russia, which has one of the world's largest populations of researchers, yet has remained barely visible in the international academic landscape for many decades.</p>