The activity of the “Union of the Descendants of the Dutch” through the prism of official documents (1922-1927)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to show how the activities of the Mennonite closed cooperative “Union of the Descendants of the Dutch” (UDD) were refl ected in the offi cial reports of Soviet offi cials; to analyze the importance of the organization for the consolidation of the ethno-confessional community of Mennonites in Ukraine. The research methodology: the general scientifi c (method of system analysis) and special historical (historical-comparative, historical-genetic, problem-chronological) methods are used. Scientifi c novelty: the study notes the importance of the “Union of the Descendants of the Dutch” in reviving and preserving the moral and ethical principles of the ethno-confessional group, and shows the organization’s infl uence on protecting the rights of national minorities in the Soviet state. Conclusions. In the conditions of the early Soviet rule, the economic decline of the region, the location of the Mennonite colonies, and the demoralization of the ethno-confessional community, the “Union” served to coordinate the life and preserve the traditions of the Mennonite communities. The fact that the organization was built on ethnic principles, existed with the help of foreign Mennonite centres (Germany, the Netherlands, the United States, Canada), and abandoned atheistic principles, caused great concern on the part of party, and administrative authorities. Feeling unable to adapt to new political conditions, the UDD led the Mennonite emigration movement of 1923–1926, which gained international notoriety and created a negative image of the Soviet state. The activities of the “Union” were under the supervision of the authorities since 1924. As the totalitarian systemin the USSR and increasing pressure on dissent, the authorities found an offi cial reason for the dissolution of the organization, which took place even in the policy of indigenization. As a result of the liquidation of the organization, the Mennonite population of the USSR found itself vulnerable to pressure from the authorities and shared the fate of the entire Ukrainian peasantry.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".