Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soon after Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev exposed Joseph Stalin’s crimes in February 1956, several Stalinist dictators in Eastern Europe similar in outlook to Romanian general secretary Gheorghiu-Dej were discredited and toppled by rivals: Hungary (Mátyás Rákosi), Poland (Edward Ochab), and Bulgaria (Vulko Velev Chervenkov), as were Stalinist leaders in western communist parties, such as in Greece (Nikolaos Zachariadis). Gheorghiu-Dej, however, managed to keep his post until his death from lung cancer in 1965. Romania, the only country other than Albania to maintain a tight clamp over its citizens, also became the only Warsaw Pact country from which both Soviet troops (1958) and KGB advisors (1964) were actually withdrawn during the Cold War. This article will show that that Gheorghiu-Dej, too, faced a threat to his power in 1956. Two Politburo members, Miron Constantinescu and losif Chif inevschi, had risked criticizing the Romanian leader, to some extent at the March Plenum, but mostly at the Politburo meetings of 3, 4, 6 and 12 April 1956. Drawing on the minutes of these meetings, never before published in English translation, as well as other Romanian archival documents and recent scholarship, this article will argue that the factional challenge of Dej failed primarily because offour factors that both discredited the oppositionists and mobilized the Bucharest leaders - especially the disgraced politicians - to act in concert to contain the spread of the Hungarian revolution into Romania. These are: the oppositionists ' lack of support from Moscow; the lack of living martyrs and recognition of mutual guilt for spreading the personality cult; collective memories of their underground days with the concomitant fear offactionalism; and aversion to "petty bourgeois intellectualism. "
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".