MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302237152 · doi:10.3138/gsi.10.1.07

Cambodia’s Political Economy of Violence: Space, Time, and Genocide Under the Khmer Rouge, 1975–79

2016· article· en· W2302237152 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
James A. Tyner

Bibliographic record

VenueGenocide Studies International · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCambodian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenocideCapitalismCommunismMarxist philosophyPoliticsIdeologyPolitical economyPolitical violenceState (computer science)Materiality (auditing)NarrativePolitical scienceState capitalismSociologyLawAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between 1975 and 1979, approximately two million Cambodians died from exposure, disease, starvation, and execution under the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK), also known as the Khmer Rouge. The standard narrative interprets these murders as the brutal acts of a cadre of radical communist ideologues, bent on establishing a pure, despotic, and autarkic state. Using a Marxist approach to political economy, this paper challenges the standard narrative, finding that these killings were a consequence of the CPK’s attempt to establish a system of state capitalism that exploited workers through the production of increasing surpluses. This analysis reveals the particular and deliberate structural arrangements that made the deaths of millions a justifiable consequence. In so doing, we seek to highlight the broader benefits of a Marxist analysis of political economy in the study of genocide; notably its emphasis on the materiality of violence and its ability to expose the forms of social organization that produce mass violence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenocide Studies InternationalSame topicCambodian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207