The Holocaust Paradigm as Paradoxical Imperative in the Century of Anthropogenic Omnicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Holocaust and today's climate emergency are not obvious bed fellows. But the post-Holocaust mantra “never again” has also been voiced by some climate activists who see similarities in the failure of Western governments in the 1930s to act to stop Hitler and an equivalent failure now to effectively halt state and corporate drives to biospheric catastrophe. This article examines whether the way Western society has understood the Holocaust in recent decades has relevance to the urge for climate action. It finds the mainstream, state-centred Holocaust paradigm wanting as a framework for empathy and solidarity with those in the Global South who will continue to suffer most as the environmental crisis magnifies. But with the likelihood of an explosion of environmental refugees across the world in coming decades and the increasing exclusion of those deemed outside the universe of obligation, it posits that Holocaust resonances are especially relevant in the here and now. In particular, it urges that the state of siege and exception likely to become prevalent as societies increasingly turn nationally populist and violent in the face of climate breakdown, demands a transformation of the Holocaust paradigm into one of active, grass-roots voice, speaking truth to power.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.096 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".