Bibliographic record
Abstract
Raphael Lemkin coined the word genocide and led a movement in the United Nations to outlaw the crime in the 1940s. During the 1920s and 1930s, Lemkin worked to establish an international criminal court at the League of Nations, and to criminalize state terror and the repression of national minorities. After the Second World War, Lemkin worked to enshrine the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which is now a cornerstone of international humanitarian law. For several decades after the 1940s, however, Lemkin’s accomplishments were ignored, partly because he left nearly 20,000 pages of writings on genocide unpublished, and partly because, in the context of the Cold War, global politics did not value humanitarian law. With the outbreak of genocide in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda in the 1990s, the Genocide Convention became relevant to world affairs and Lemkin studies enjoyed a renaissance. Yet, until 2007, there were only two monographs written about Lemkin, and one was authored by a Holocaust denier. This dissertation is the first intellectual biography and political history of Lemkin. The argument begins by examining Lemkin’s Polish writings in the 1920s and 30s, and demonstrates that Polish legal, social, and political theory influenced Lemkin’s work on genocide in the 1940s and 1950s. Secondly, the thesis also presents the first scholarly analysis of Lemkin’s magnum opus, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, placing the book in the context of contemporary theorists and into the historiography of Holocaust and genocide studies. The third part of the dissertation uses Lemkin’s nearly 20,000-page archive to show his influence at the Nuremberg trials. Lemkin’s memoirs and papers are used to present a new account of the diplomatic history of the UN Genocide Convention drafting processes, arguing that the US, UK, France, South Africa, Belgium, and Canada, opposed the convention but were out-maneuvered politically by a coalition of smaller states and former colonies, and global social movement Lemkin inspired. The final chapter then uses Lemkin’s manuscripts to elucidate his social and political theory of genocide that he worked on while teaching at Yale and Rutgers universities, but died before he could publish.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".