Mobilization of the Wealthy to Contest Income Inequality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
this paper, we look at the prospects for mobilization of the wealthy to contest widening income inequality. We begin by looking at members of an organization that supports the mobilization of grassroots groups on behalf of economic justice. We found among its members an "unexpected voice" -- the voice of wealthy people grappling with their fairly invisible wealth and their own surprise that it evoked such a series of emotions and a gradual process they termed "coming out" as wealthy. We discuss the implications of this identity formation and interpretation for the organization's ability to shape a collective agenda for social change. This study locates a novel space at the intersection of business and society -- where the spoils of business are used to redress societal inequalities, and even to reshape how business is conducted. Forthcoming: Proceedings for the 13th Annual International Association of Business and Society (IABS) Conference. June 29, 2002. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada The study of civil rights activism has focused on social identities such as race, gender, and sexual orientation and the mobilization of historically oppressed groups: African Americans (e.g., McAdam, 1988), women (e.g., Mansbridge, 1986), and gay / lesbian / bisexual / transgendered people (e.g., Vaid, 1996). There has been a shift in some work on identity politics to include the concomitantly privileged groups whose social identity had been left invisible or just backgrounded as "normal:" white people (e.g., Thompson, 2001), men (e.g., Collinson & Hearn, 1996), and straight people (e.g., Creed & Scully, 2000). This shift has had two themes. First, the privileged have social identities too (e.g., white people have a race), and these bear the same amount of scrutiny and insight as his...
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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".