MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416421105 · doi:10.24158/pep.2025.10.23

Evolution of C.B. Macpherson’s Views on Liberal and Socialist Democracy: Critical Analysis

2025· article· W4416421105 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Egor M. Sorokin

Bibliographic record

VenueОбщество политика экономика право · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyMarxist philosophyIndividualismPolitical philosophyLiberalismPoliticsLiberal democracySocialism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Article is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the political thought of the Canadian theorist Crawford Brough Macpherson (1911–1987), with particular emphasis on his critique of liberal democracy and advocacy for a socialist democratic alternative. Drawing on his key works, ranging from early essays of the 1930s to late monographs of the 1980s, the study traces the evolution of Macpherson’s ideas from the concept of possessive individualism as a fundamental flaw in liberal systems to a vision of developmental, participatory democracy designed to incorporate the core tenets of Marxist critique and reconcile them with liberal values. To assess strengths and weaknesses, the article includes critiques and commentaries from scholars such as William Leiss, Phillip Hansen, Frank Cunningham, Ian McKay, Ellen Meiksins Wood, and others. The article argues that Macpherson’s ideas remain relevant to contemporary debates on inequality, democratic participation, and al-ternatives to neoliberalism, despite criticisms of their abstractness, insufficient attention to class relations, and human nature.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0140.063
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueОбщество политика экономика правоSame topicPolitical Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207