The Right in France: From the Third Republic to Vichy, by Kevin Passmore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For decades, René Rémond’s La Droite en France was the indispensable reference work for students of the French Right. Kevin Passmore’s book is a worthy successor. As was the case with Rémond’s book, this one is informed by an almost encyclopaedic grasp of the secondary literature. But, and to a far greater degree than with Rémond, it is also informed by an impressive range of secondary and archival sources. So, while the book is a sweeping synthesis of a very broad topic, it also has the comfortable feel of a prodigiously researched and focused monograph. Rémond famously organised his work around the three great ideological currents of the Right: Legitimism, Orleanism and Bonapartism. Passmore makes a compelling case that these three categories, whatever analytical utility they may have for the early nineteenth century, lose their heuristic value for any point after 1890 (and probably some years before that). To be sure, Passmore is an equal-opportunity iconoclast and expresses considerable scepticism about most currently fashionable grand theories concerning French history. This is not to say that he does not see important intellectual currents flowing through the complexities of the Right. Gustave Le Bon, the well-known crowd theorist, looms large, as does the lesser-known Henri Fayol, one of the early enthusiasts for management science.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".