:Drawing the Global Colour Line: White Men's Countries and the International Challenge of Racial Equality.<i>(Critical Perspectives on Empire.)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is an important book, for colonial and imperial historians; world historians; Australian, New Zealand, South African, Canadian, U.S., Chinese, and Japanese historians; and for scholars of human rights. Simply listing its breadth of readership indicates the vast scope of the book and the multiple terrains across which it ranges. Essentially, it is an account of the traffic in ideas constructed by white men during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to bolster what W. E. B. Du Bois called the “color line”—that bundle of discourses, practices, and policies that maintained white privilege and power against the growing African and Asian “threat” in the British dominions and the United States. Two analytical devices allow such a complex and enormous terrain to be traversed without loss of direction. One is focusing on certain key individuals who engaged in influential dialogues about “race” from their respective sides of the “color line.” The effects of writings and speeches made by individuals—ranging from Lowe Kong Meng in Melbourne through Theodore Roosevelt, James Bryce, and Charles Pearson in the United States, Great Britain, and Australia, respectively, to Mohandas K. Gandhi in South Africa and India—are traced as far as possible through their personal and political networks. Once the context has been established in part one of the book, with an account of Chinese migration to the Australian goldfields and the white fears that it generated, such individuals and their texts form the basis of discussion, especially in part two.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".