MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1809498345

Moscow Rules? 'Red' Unionism and 'Class Against Class' in Britain, Canada, and the United States, 1928-1935

2005· article· en· W1809498345 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCLOK (University of Central Lancashire) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnarchism and Radical Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunismSubordination (linguistics)PoliticsPolitical scienceHumanitiesEthnologyEconomic historySociologyLawHistoryPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the still vibrant debate between traditionalist and revisionist historians of international Communism, the former tend to argue that the key to understanding the Communist experience in any country is recognition of the fundamental subordination of each national party to the will of Moscow, exercised both directly and through the Communist Internationa! (Comintern), while the latter, though rarely denying the salience of the Moscow connection, suggest that national parties enjoyed a significant degree of autonomy in resisting or adapting Moscow's demands. American revisionists in particular have emphasized the CPUSA's creative engagement with American political culture, seeing this phenomenon even in the period most traditionalists see as the point at which national parties incontrovertibly capitulated to Stalinism — the (1928-35) of Class Against Class, ultra-leftism, Social Fascism, and political catastrophe in Germany. Using the surprisingly under-used tool of comparative analysis to evaluate the conception, implementation, evolution, and of the Third Period in the United States, Britain, and Canada, this article offers some succour to the revisionists, but rather more to the traditionalists. Resume Dans le debat toujours passionne entre les historiens « traditionalistes » et «revisionnistes » du communisme international, les premiers se montrent enclins aargumenter que la cle de comprehension de l'experience communiste dans n'importe quel pays est la reconnaissance de la subordination fondamentale de chaque parti national a la volonte de « Moscou », exercee directement ou par l'intermediaire de l'Internationale communiste (Komintern), alors que les seconds, bien qu'ils nient rarement l'influence determinante des rapports avec Moscou, pretendent que les partis nationaux jouissent d'un degre remarquable d'autonomie dans la resistance ou l'adaptation des demandes du Moscou. Les revisionnistes americains en particulier ont mis l'accent sur l'engagement createur de CPUSA vis-a-vis de la culture politique americaine, en percevant ce phenomene meme dans la periode que la plupart des traditionalistes regardent comme la capitulation des partis nationaux au stalinisme - la «Troisieme Periode » (1928-35) de « lutte des classes », ultra-gauchisme, « fascisme social », et la catastrophe politique en Allemagne. En utilisant l'outil etonnamment sous-utilise de l'analyse comparative pour evaluer la conception, la mise en œuvre, revolution, et la « liquidation » de la Troisieme Periode aux Etats Unis, en Bretagne et au Canada, cet article offre un certain secours aux revisionnistes, mais beaucoup plus aux traditionalistes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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