Bibliographic record
Abstract
Samuel H. Baron. Bloody Saturday in the Soviet Union: Novocherkassk, 1962. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. xvi, 241 pp. Photographs. Appendices. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $45.00, cloth.The Khrushchev era of Soviet history saw more than two thousand popular protests of some kind and Samuel H. Baron's Bloody Saturday inthe Soviet Union is a case study of one of the most serious. In 1962, the workers of Novocherkassk suddenly faced an upward revision of their work norms followed quickly by a large increase in the prices of meat, meat products, and butter. The workers were understandably dismayed by the new policies. Despite having no direct experience to draw on, some of them quickly organized a strike that would turn deadly when the demonstrators marched on local Party headquarters to voice their anger directly to those in power. Baron's book is a thoroughly researched, detailed analysis of the strike, the massacre and its subsequent cover-up.Chapter One sets the stage for the events of 1962. Baron not only provides general information about Khrushchev's agricultural policies but also describes what life was like for the average resident of Novocherkassk. By pointing out the hardships of everyday life as experienced by factory workers and students, Baron is able to make readers understand why people were upset enough by the increase in the price of foodstuffs as well as the revision of work norms to protest against these policies.The next chapter opens with an honest, in-depth discussion of the sources available for reconstructing the strike and its suppression. Baron notes the strengths and biases of his materials and also shows that he plans to consider a variety of perspectives in his analysis. This balance is evident in the very detailed timeline that is then presented for the first day's events. By devoting space to both the perspective of the strikers and of the various officials who sought to put down the affair, Baron is able to demonstrate the sheer complexity of the strike itself and remind the reader of some of the potential pitfalls of historical research in general. One of the most important points to emerge from this chapter is that state officials simply did not understand how the strikers saw themselves. For instance, on page 37, Baron describes how the strikers destroyed pictures of Khrushchev as part of their protest but not because they wanted to overthrow the Soviet system. Instead, they were attacking a symbol of authority because they believed that the current leadership had somehow deviated from an idealized Leninist line and betrayed the interests of the working class whom they now represented.The events of the strike's second day, namely the march of the protesters to local Party headquarters and the subsequent massacre of the demonstrators, are the focus of Chapter Three. …
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.019 |
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".