MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281943591 · doi:10.52975/llt.2022v89.006

“If You Want Anything, You Have to Fight for It”

2022· article· en· W4281943591 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cameron D. Willis

Bibliographic record

VenueLabour / Le Travail · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDignityConvictPolitical scienceHumanitiesGreat DepressionLawSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For four days in October 1932, during the height of the Great Depression, prisoners at Kingston Penitentiary revolted. They took control of their workshops and brought the convict labour regime to a halt, until the guards and militia violently regained control. This revolt was the culmination of more than a year of organizing and collective actions. Prisoners wrote manifestos, participated in work refusals, elected representatives, and developed a sophisticated critique of the conditions of their incarceration and the penitentiary administration. Using a unique collection of archival documents, this article closely examines the complaints, criticisms, fears, hopes, and frustrations of the incarcerated, whose demands and goals are crucial for understanding how and why the prisoner revolt unfolded as it did. I argue that the prisoners at Kingston Penitentiary, by striking and organizing to assert their dignity, democratically organized their lives and ensured a “fair deal” should be considered part of the Depression-era protests of the unemployed, imprisoned, and marginalized. Pendant quatre jours en octobre 1932, au plus fort de la Grande Dépression, les prisonniers du Pénitencier de Kingston se sont révoltés. Ils ont pris le contrôle de leurs ateliers et ont mis un terme au régime du travail des condamnés, jusqu’à ce que les gardes et les miliciens reprennent violemment le contrôle. Cette révolte a été l’aboutissement de plus d’un an d’organisation et d’actions collectives. Les détenus ont rédigé des manifestes, participé à des refus de travail, élu des représentants et élaboré une critique sophistiquée des conditions de leur incarcération et de l’administration pénitentiaire. À partir d’un ensemble unique de documents d’archives, cet article examine de près les plaints, les critiques, les peurs, les espoirs et les frustrations des incarcérés, dont les revendications et les objectifs sont essentiels pour comprendre comment et pourquoi la révolte des prisonniers s’est déroulée comme elle était. Je soutiens que les prisonniers du Pénitencier de Kingston, en faisant la grève et en s’organisant pour affirmer leur dignité, ayant organisé démocratiquement leur vie et assuré un « accord équitable » devraient être considérés comme faisant partie des manifestations des chômeurs, emprisonnés et marginalisés de l’époque de la Dépression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0130.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.010

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabour / Le Travail→Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→