Bibliographic record
Abstract
The resurrection of Keynes and Keynesianism in the wake of the recent financial crisis is widely assumed to index the similarities between the present conjuncture and the Great Depression. But Keynesian reason—an analytical approach to the contradictions at the core of liberal capitalist civil society—is much older and has animated ‘progressive’ liberal and Left thought since Hegel reflected on the consequences of the French Revolution. What drives this persistent knee-jerk Keynesianism, and why has it become so central to progressive and Left politics in capitalist societies? This article argues that the key to understanding both Keynes and the persistent appeal of Keynesianism lies in a widely shared, and increasingly unshakeable, fear of disorder, populist reaction, and distrust of mass politics, sentiments shared by both liberals and ‘progressives’. In these conditions, what appears to be at risk is not so much the current order as order itself, and the capacity to imagine a political trajectory outside the bounds of existing structures is so constrained as to make those very structures seem like the only means of escape. The constant renewal of Keynesianism, by radicals and liberals, is today built in to both liberal and Left thinking, a product of two centuries of political thought in the face of existential threats to the very notion of ‘civilization’.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".