MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Le travail, marchandise fictive ? 100 ans de marchandisation de la main d’œuvre mexicaine aux États-Unis

2008· article· fr· W1481111257 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yves-Marie Abraham

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventions économiques · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketizationCommodityEconomicsLabour economicsMarket economyPolitical scienceChinaLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pour Karl Polanyi, la société de marché est impossible, car elle suppose de traiter le travail, la terre et la monnaie comme des marchandises, ce qui ne peut qu’être destructeur de la société. A partir d’une analyse de l’utilisation de la main d’œuvre mexicaine par les employeurs américains depuis 100 ans, nous tentons de montrer que cette marchandisation est tout à fait possible en ce qui concerne le travail. Elle consiste, dans son principe, à réduire l’être humain à sa seule force de travail, tout en restant dans le cadre formel du salariat. Dans le cas des travailleurs mexicains, qu’il s’agisse d’ouvriers agricoles bénéficiant d’un contrat de travail temporaire sur le sol américain, d’employés de maquiladoras sur le sol mexicain ou de travailleurs sans-papiers vivant aux États-Unis, la frontière territoriale entre les deux pays apparaît comme un moyen particulièrement efficace pour accomplir cette réduction. C’est dire aussi que cette marchandisation du travail n’est pas forcément la conséquence de la mise en place de marchés autorégulateurs, contrairement à ce que soutient Polanyi.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventions économiquesSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207