MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W303022657

Legal Ethics after Auschwitz: The Case against SNCF

2011· article· en· W303022657 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Harriet Tamen

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of ecumenical studies · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCriminal Law and Evidence
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLawHonorNazismRefugeeMoralityResistance (ecology)Spanish Civil WarPolitical scienceSociologyHistoryPolitics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

It is an honor to be among those who speak about the unspeakable; who try to make sense of history in a world that would rather forget the past. Among those that would rather forget are the French, including the French National Railroad, SNCF. Choices and consequences and law and morality--all intersect in the case we have brought against SNCF. SNCF made certain choices, and, as a consequence, tens of thousands of people died. Attempting to ignore all issues of morality, SNCF simply argues that it is beyond the reach of law. The first SNCF train deporting Jews left France for Auschwitz on March 27, 1942. The last one left France on August 17, 1944, one week before the liberation of Paris. SNCF operated more than seventy-two convoys of trains deporting 75,000 Jews and tens of thousands of other undesirables, including Gypsies, Spanish civil-war refugees, homosexuals, and resistance fighters. Also on the trains, there were over 186 U.S., British, and Canadian pilots shot down over France. Fewer than three percent of those deported survived. This transportation was essential for the success of the final solution. SNCF made available the necessary rolling stock, scheduled the trips, supplied the employees, and cleaned and disinfected cars after each trip. SNCF had a choice. It could have refused to cooperate, or it could have engaged in acts of passive and active resistance. Instead, to protect its autonomy, SNCF helped the Nazis. Even though individual SNCF employees were active in the French resistance, and German troop trains were occasionally sabotaged, the SNCF deportation trains kept running. Not one single deportation train was ever sabotaged. SNCF was and remained under civilian control during the war. In order to maintain that control and independence, SNCF willingly collaborated with the Germans. There was no gun to anyone's head, no force, no coercion. The wagons were not passenger cars; most of them had previously been used for cattle. Sanitation facilities were nonexistent--a bucket in the comer. Those on the trains included the sick, the elderly, pregnant women, babies, and young children. The trips took days, often in extreme heat or freezing cold; many did not survive. One train left the French holding camp at Compiegne, Fance, on July 2, 1944, with 2,166 passengers. When it arrived at Dachau three days later, 536 were already dead. SNCF was paid for transporting passengers on the deportation trains--per head, per kilometer, standard commercial fares, the same fares for deportees as for ordinary travelers taking an ordinary trip. Billing was handled the same way it was handled for all commercial trains. Like any good business, SNCF billed quarterly; payments more than thirty days late accrued interest of 1.5%. It even sent its last bill to DeGaulle after the liberation of France. Each person was permitted to bring one suitcase or package on the train. Once the victims were loaded onto the cars, SNCF employees took the cases, saying that they would be returned. Nothing was ever returned. There is no accounting of what was taken and no information publicly available on what happened to that property, since SNCF archives are still closed to the public. More than 600 victims and heirs from around the world filed a class-action law suit in September, 2000, seeking to hold SNCF liable for the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity arising out of the deportation of civilians--a violation of the Nuremberg principles. SNCF is one of the 500 largest corporations in the world and earns more than $100,000,000 annually in the U.S. alone. However, its shares are owned by the government and have been since 1938. SNCF has always argued that it is entitled to sovereign immunity in the U.S. It has never denied its actions; SNCF has simply taken the position that it cannot be sued in U.S. courts. The law that controls jurisdiction over sovereign governments and their agencies and instrumentalities is the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976. …

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,163
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,324

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,021
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0270,032
Communication savante0,0070,004
Science ouverte0,0020,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0270,019
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,289
Tête enseignante GPT0,443
Écart entre enseignants0,154 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of ecumenical studiesMême sujetCriminal Law and EvidenceTravaux en français237 207