Book Review: The Crime of All Crimes: Towards a Criminology of Genocide
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Contending with a subject that has provoked sustained interest across many disciplines within the social sciences, Nicole Rafter's latest book is an important addition to the ever-expanding field of genocide studies, one which will be appreciated by scholars and students of genocide from, for instance, history, sociology, psychology, law, political science and international relations.That Rafter herself is aware of the attention from diverse audiences that her book might inevitably garner is evident from the skilful way in which she engages with and navigates through the wealth of existing multidisciplinary scholarship and research on genocide throughout her book.This is all the more impressive given that this was Rafter's very first book on genocide, having only taken an interest in genocide in recent years.For those deeply immersed in genocide studies and its evolving conceptual and empirical concerns, Rafter's book successfully speaks to, and builds upon, important work that has already been done in the field, particularly concerning colonial genocides, the gendered nature of genocides, and the micro-level variables that enable and sustains genocides.Meanwhile, for those newly acquainted with genocide studies, the book provides an accessible overview of the key debates and studies that have come to define the field.Rafter is a criminologist and her book, as its title suggests, is an examination of genocide from a criminological perspective.While criminologists have started to contribute to the study of genocide, this body of scholarship is still, as Rafter points out, relatively small.Rafter's key aim, therefore, is to demonstrate more forcefully how, and to what extent, criminology can contribute towards a better understanding of genocide.Rafter stamps her unique mark in contemporary genocide scholarship by weaving together an overarching framework to wrestle with the phenomenon that is genocide.Capitalizing on criminology's interdisciplinary character, Rafter draws upon ideas from political science, psychology, sociology, and legal philosophy to construct her analytical building blocks.The result is a comprehensive conceptual vocabulary for genocide, one aimed at simultaneously grappling with the macro, meso and micro elements of genocide.In this regard, a number of Rafter's novel conceptual ideas have the prospect of guiding future research on genocide.This includes her idea of "genocidal propensity," which is aimed at predicting which states are more predisposed towards committing genocides, in order to more effectively prevent genocides before they occur; the idea of "hot genocides," which indicates how the intensification of genocide's emotional dynamics mark turning points in genocidal violence; and finally, the idea that "genocidal organizations" create "states of exception," as a tool to mobilize genocidal destruction without fear of consequences.Rafter's empirical task is ambitious: a comparative study of eight historical cases of genocides, occurring across the world and covering the period between 1900 and 2000.Following a common position embraced by many genocide scholars, she adopts a definition of genocide that goes beyond the one currently enshrined in international law.The destruction of political groupsnotably excluded from the Genocide Convention-is added as a protected group in Rafter's analysis, alongside national, ethnic, racial and religious groups.This allows the genocide of the Herero by the German colonial army, the Armenians by the Ottoman Turks, Polish nationalists by Stalin, Indonesian anti-communists by Suharto's regime, political opponents by Pol Pot's regime, the Mayas by the Guatemalan state, and the Tutsis by the Rwandan Hutus to fall under the scope of her study.This is relatively uncontroversial; what is controversial, however, is her inclusion
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,027 | 0,013 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».