La catégorie d'"indésirable" et la politique d'internement des étrangers et étrangères en zone libre, 1938-1942. Le cas de Marseille.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter analyzes the bureaucratic and police continuities between the tightening of measures against foreigners in 1938, the management aimed at neutralizing "enemy nationals" during the 1939-1940 war, and the implementation of state anti-Semitism between 1940 and 1942. In the end, the Laval-Bousquet policy of the summer of 1942 was as much the consequence of Nazi pressure as the result of a "conjunction of interests" between German and French policies. The "rush", on the French side, of administrative policies targeting "undesirable foreigners, many of whom were Jewish refugees", and "aiming to find ever more effective solutions to make them leave the country" largely explains why "the implementation of the 'Final Solution' by the Nazi regime was seen by the French authorities as an opportunity to get rid of foreign Jews". The focus on this objective explains the blindness of certain Vichy authorities as to the obviously criminal consequences of the deliveries of Jews in 1942 - the very anti-Semitic intendant of the Marseilles police, Maurice de Rodellec du Porzic, thus seems incapable of discerning what separates the emigration of "undesirable" foreigners to the Americas in 1940 from the deportation of Jewish refugees in the concentration system.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".