MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382646194 · doi:10.1093/jahist/jaad168

White Philanthropy: Carnegie Corporation's <i>An American Dilemma</i> and the Making of a White World Order

2023· article· en· W4382646194 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAmerican History and Culture
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)DilemmaCorporationChapelOrder (exchange)American historyExecutive orderRand corporationManagementHistoryPolitical scienceSociologyLawArt historyAncient historyBusinessPhilosophyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this in-depth history of the genesis of the Carnegie Corporation's magisterial An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (1944), Maribel Morey uncovers the white supremacist underpinnings of the foundational text of mid-twentieth-century racial liberalism and of the American philanthropy that sponsored it. As it turns out, this ideology was hiding in plain sight in the title itself. From its Gilded Age beginnings, modern American philanthropy was fixated on the so-called Negro problem, or how, in the post-emancipation period, the white elite could peacefully maintain the racial domination on which the national economy depended and the society was built. The Carnegie Corporation's innovation was to turn away in the 1930s from the failed philanthropic strategy of funding Black vocational education to keep African Americans as quiescent sharecroppers in the South, and toward interdisciplinary social-scientific and policy-oriented research to address Black urbanization as the putative cause of racial conflict and social pathologies in American life. What remained unchanged for philanthropists was a fundamental disregard for African Americans and their freedom struggles as anything but a threat to the nation. It is no coincidence that Francis Keppel, the Carnegie Corporation's longtime president and key figure in Morey's book, began his decades-long interest in this “problem” while monitoring “Negro subversion” for the War Department during World War I (p. 134).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0150.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.005

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American HistorySame topicAmerican History and CultureFrench-language works237,207