<i>Stjepan Radic, the Croat Peasant Party, and the Politics of Mass Mobilization, 1904–1928</i>. By B<scp>iondich</scp>, M<scp>ark</scp>. University of Toronto Press, Toronto [etc.] 2000. xi, 344 pp. C$60.00. (Paper: C$24.95.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book could not have been timed better.At the end of the 1990s the political debate on German immigration policy intensi®ed as the red±green coalition headed by Gerhard Schro È der pushed for of®cial acknowledgement of Germany as an immigration country, and for the possibility of actively recruiting immigrants from outside the European Union for economic and demographic reasons.Klaus Bade, director of the Institute for Migration and Intercultural Studies (IMIS) at the University of Osnabru È ck and for many years the leading and most proli®c German migration historian, was involved as adviser to the government.Judging from the manifold and very positive reviews that have appeared in the major German newspapers and magazines, his latest book played an important role in this discussion.This is not to say that Europa in Bewegung (Europe in Movement) is merely a political pamphlet, in which history is used as ammunition to prepare the public for a new migration policy.It is a well-written and thoroughly documented overview of Europe's migration history in the past two centuries.In contrast to many studies that use ``Europe'' in the title and then concentrate on one or just a few western European countries, this book is a serious effort to include the southern and eastern parts of the continent, especially where the twentieth century is concerned.Moreover, Bade has systematically drawn from the relevant social-scienti®c literature, thus adding the often dramatic changes in migration streams and regimes during the last decades of the twentieth century to complement the historical picture.The stress is clearly on migration and the way the movement of people within and towards Europe has been viewed by states and their subjects.In the second part of the book in particular, much attention is paid to the interplay between migration and politics, both at national and European level.This also explains the choice of 1914, 1945 and 1990 (the collapse of the Iron Curtain) as major turning points.In this sense Bade's book differs from the path-breaking study by Leslie Page Moch (Moving Europeans: Migration in Western Europe since 1650, published in 1992), which includes the early modern period and focuses much more on migrants and on the relationship between the history of migration and general socioeconomic developments (demography, family formation, protoindustry, industrialization, urbanization, etc.).Although Bade, who often refers to Moch's study, also pays attention to these linkages, he is clearly more interested in state policies and the lessons that can be drawn from the past.The difference between Europa in Bewegung and Moving Europeans is less obvious in the ®rst part of the book (chapters 1 and 2), which deals extensively with the long nineteenth century (1789±1914).Bade also stresses the importance of the changing character of the labour market for our understanding of migration.To illustrate the point that migration is not a recent phenomenon but a structural element in Europe's history, he often uses examples, like the Germans from Hesse in Paris or the Poles in the Ruhr area.These excursions are instructive and make the book easy to read.Using Klessman's classic study on the Ruhr Poles and Noiriel's book on Longwy, he also paints a colourful picture of Europe's ``Wild West'' in many rapidly expanding European industrial towns, which
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".