Racisme(s) ? Une étude rhétorique critique de la polémique sur le racisme anti-Blancs en France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le 25 mars 2005 a ete lance en France un appel contre le racisme anti-Blancs pour denoncer des agressions dont ont ete victimes de jeunes lyceens, en marge d'une manifestation lyceenne s'etant deroulee le 8 mars 2005 a Paris. Cet appel provient d'un mouvement de jeunesse sioniste de gauche, Hachomer Hatza'ir - sur le site duquel l'appel a ete publie - et de Radio Shalom, une radio destinee a la communaute juive de France. Le but de notre essai est de reconstruire, a partir de l'appel contre le racisme anti-Blancs du 25 mars et de ses fragments, un texte suitable for criticism, suivant la formule du rhetoricien critique americain Michael Calvin McGee ; un texte qui permette a notre audience de developper son esprit critique, habituellement emousse par la dispersion du sens et le non-dit (les fragments omis) des textes qui lui sont presentes. Nous chercherons a mettre au jour les pretentions a la validite du texte pour en analyser le contenu a la lumiere de sa genealogie (incomplete), du contexte qui accompagne sa stabilisation dans l'espace public et de sa dispersion immediate. Nous verrons comment la mise en avant de la notion de racisme anti-Blancs par l'appel du 25 mars informe une rearticulation de la notion de racisme en France.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".