MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923905943 · doi:10.1177/0020702019834716

The view from MARS: US paleoconservatism and ideological challenges to the liberal world order

2019· article· en· W2923905943 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean-François Drolet, Michael C. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPopulism, Right-Wing Movements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIdeologyPopulismConservatismPoliticsPolitical scienceMainstreamArticulation (sociology)Political economyOrder (exchange)SociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Challenges to the liberal international order have tended to focus on the politics of populism most often traced to reactions against economic dislocation and mass migration. Parts of this portrait are undoubtedly true, but it also risks being deeply misleading. To fully understand the nature and depth of contemporary far-right movements, we need to examine more closely the distinctive ideological movements that inform and animate them. This article explores one specific articulation of these movements: US paleoconservatism. Although relatively unknown in the mainstream media, this anti-establishment strain of radical conservatism has provided intellectual ammunition to a wide range of agents and ideological forces challenging the prevailing liberal order nationally and internationally, including important parts of the anti-liberal politics of foreign policy under President Donald Trump.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.026
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisSame topicPopulism, Right-Wing MovementsFrench-language works237,207