MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W301793977

Under the Shadow of the Swastika: Moral Dilemmas of Resistance and Collaboration in Hitler's Europe

2001· article· en· W301793977 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueShofar · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicItalian Fascism and Post-war Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNazismThe HolocaustNazi concentration campsLawWorld War IINazi GermanyDissentDeportationShadow (psychology)Political scienceResistance (ecology)GermanIdeologySociologyReligious studiesPoliticsHistoryPhilosophyPsychoanalysisPsychologyImmigration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under Shadow of Swastika: Moral Dilemmas of Resistance and Collaboration in Hitler's EuropeStuds Terkel characterized World War II as the good It is a view that still commands assent. Arthur Koestler spoke of World War II as a fight between gray and black. nature of Nazi Germany with its radical violation of what have come to be regarded as civilized values was such that it continues to be viewed as evil that had to be destroyed. Bennett cites Jean Amery's statement that The Swastika...became universal symbol of what is humanly and historically intolerable. Even now few would dissent from this view.Nazi Germany occupied much of Europe. Occupation policies were almost always brutal -- mass executions, torture, deportations, forced labor all were part of Hitler's New Order. In countries occupied by Germany some individuals became collaborators. Motives for collaboration varied. Some acted out of self-interest. Others, such as Vidkun Quisling in Norway, did so because they believed in and supported Nazi ideology. Many saw collaboration as lesser evil compared to its alternatives. In France Marshal Petain and Pierre Laval believed that reaching an understanding with Nazis would moderate excesses, that their collaboration with them would save lives. Yet German demands increased and contamination became unavoidable (p. 56) And Vichy and Nazi Germany shared some views, such as anti-Semitism. Laval coordinated Jewish deportations, and encouraged deportation of children under 16. Civil servants in occupied countries usually stayed on their jobs, as did police forces who, usually willingly, carried out German demands.Resistance movements against German occupation and against collaborators arose as German brutalities increased and as fortunes of war turned against Germany. Bennett notes development of a romantic myth of resistance after war. Popularized in novels, radio, films and TV -- I recall a song by Leonard Cohen glorifying partisan from 1960s -- image of resistance fighter as heroic and morally pure still is widely held. mass bombing of cities -- there is now near universal agreement that bombing of Dresden was wrong -- targeting of civilians and other acts have been questioned, but resistance movements have not received any critical examination. Under Shadow of Swastika holds that while we must recognize the enormous physical and moral courage that it required to engage in underground warfare (p. 27), moral issues about resistance activities need to be examined. For example, use of torture by members of resistance, which Bennett documents in some detail, has not been mentioned in studies about resistance movement. …

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · 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