Warren Rosenblum . Beyond the Prison Gates: Punishment and Welfare in Germany, 1850–1933.<i>(Studies in Legal History.)</i>Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press . 2008 . Pp. xii, 326. $49.95.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Warren Rosenblum's monograph examining criminal justice reform in Prussia from the 1850s to 1933 challenges the existing literature on turn-of-the-century criminology and interwar welfare reform. Rosenblum demonstrates that “modern criminal reform” in Germany should be studied as a “subset of the social question.” He emphasizes continuity across these decades, but not in terms of an increasingly disciplinary criminal justice system that climaxes in the brutality of the Third Reich. Rather his trajectory is one of the increasing “welfarization of criminal policy” that slowed only partially under the Nazi dictatorship and culminated in the West German reforms of the 1950s and 1960s. Rosenblum makes the further argument that these reforms explain why Germany enjoys one of the lowest incarceration rates in the world today. In the first chapter, Rosenblum begins with classical liberal reformers who called for the elimination of all arbitrariness in judicial proceedings as the only way to achieve equality, while accepting the use of extrajuridical surveillance of those who had forfeited their free will through their criminal conviction. The most powerful critique of police supervision in the late nineteenth century came from conservative Christian reformers, who complained that exclusionary practices like curfews and limits on residence made the moral rehabilitation of released convicts nearly impossible. Over time some reformers came to believe the work could be evenly divided: state punishment would act as a deterrent to crime, and social welfare organizations would rehabilitate criminals.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".