The Conquest of Nature and the Mystique of the Eastern Frontier in Nazi Germany
Bibliographic record
Abstract
German subjugation of Poland in 1939 and early military successes against the Soviet Union after June 1941 unleashed grandiose projects for German settlements in the east. These proposed the uprooting of tens of millions of people. Germans and other approved races would be the settlers. Some of the original inhabitants would be “Germanized”; the rest were marked down for destruction, slave labor as “helot” peoples, or “resettlement” further east. This is now fairly well known, thanks to a striking shift of emphasis among recent historians of the Third Reich, away from the years 1933–1939, toward the six wartime years that followed. Scholars have familiarized us with the planning for a “German East”: Its brutality and soured utopianism, its dynamism that was always colored by interagency disputes. Many different elements and motives in those plans have been drawn out: a belief in geopolitical destiny; the loot and plunder of materials and manpower; the technocratic zeal of planners and “experts”; the drive for Lebensraum, or “living space”; the perceived need for military security on the border; the imperative of provisioning the Wehrmacht; and the underlying (although in practice highly inconsistent) belief in German racial superiority, with its corollary, the sense of a mission to bring German “order” to the backward east.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".