Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este ensayo se enfoca en dar a conocer algunas de las formas y las razones por las cuales el Estado y el Partido Comunista Salvadoreño (PCS), así como sus simpatizantes conmemoraron la denominada matanza ocurrida en 1932. Esta investigación da a conocer memorias públicas de la masacre a través de documentos o discursos oficiales emitidos por ambos bandos durante los años 1932-1948, 1970-1979, 1980-1992 y 1992-2012. Este trabajo tiene como eje central ciertas ideas de Elizabeth Jelin expuestas en el libro Memorias de la Represión, en donde señala que lo que se recuerda se activa en un presente para llenar ciertas expectativas. Mi objetivo es tratar de dar a conocer que las memorias del Estado y del PCS, y por sus simpatizantes sobre la matanza en los documentos examinados, no fueron hechas para esclarecer la masacre, sino para utilizarse como armas de unificación política entre ambos grupos en momentos de crisis y como inspiración para enfrentar nuevas luchas y hacer proselitismo. This essay focuses on some of the ways and reasons why the State and the Salvadorian Communist Party (PCS), and called supporters, commemorated the massacre of 1932. This research discloses public memories of the massacre by official documents or statements issued by both sides during the years 1932-1948, 1970-1979, 1980-1992 and 1992-2012. This paper makes use of some of Elizabeth Jelin`s ideas expressed in the book Memories of Repression. For instance, Jelin mentions that what is remembered can later be used to fulfill certain expectations. The objective of this work is to argue that the public commemorations made from the Salvadorian Government and PCS, as well as their supporters regarding La Matanza, did not pretend to clarify it. What these public commemorations from both sides wanted to achieve instead, was to use their respective memories as weapons of political unification, among each party, during time of crisis, and as inspiration to face new struggles as well as to make proselytism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".