MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401897696 · doi:10.31518/2618-9100-2024-4-7

The Turn to Coercion in the USSR on June 26, 1940: Reading at the Junction of Global and National History

2024· article· en· W4401897696 on OpenAlex
Роман Романов

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueHistorical Courier · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geopolitical and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsCoercion (linguistics)Reading (process)Turn (biochemistry)Political scienceHistoryLawLinguisticsPhilosophyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is devoted to proving the research hypothesis that the decree of June 26, 1940, before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War, was a criminal law mechanism for forcing employees to indefinitely fulfill employment contracts in the Soviet industry, typologically close to the "similar" British experience of the 19 th century.This task is solved on the basis of an interdisciplinary synthesis of concepts of global and national labor history.In line with the stated methodology, the processes of formation and development of the phenomenon of legal criminalization of unauthorized departure of workers from enterprises in the leading countries of Western Europe, their overseas colonies and Russia in the Modern era are analyzed.It is revealed that at that time in the world and domestic industry there was a class hierarchical order of masters and servants, based on the legislative right of manufacturers to prosecute hired proletarians for non-fulfillment of fixed-term contracts.In recent times, it has been replaced by a new hierarchy of industrial managers and employees, which functioned mainly through a system of disciplinary penalties.It is shown that, unlike the West, the Soviet state relied not only on administrative, but also judicial and repressive practices of disciplining the working class.In the 1920s-1930s, the most stringent forms of social control over production workers operated according to ideological criteria within the framework of correctional labor and criminal law.It is established that on June 26, 1940, under the influence of the internal crisis and the Second World War in the USSR, there was a return to the rational and legal foundation of state violence.On the one hand, the transfer of criminal law norms to pre-war labor legislation was a revival of the already wellforgotten tradition of criminalizing the unauthorized departure of personnel from factories, which, according to formal signs, according to the typology similar to the Anglo-Saxon "analogues" of the second and third quarters of the 19 th century.On the other hand, the Soviet specifics of the reminiscence of coercion to fulfill civil employment contracts consisted in the presence of permanent attachment of workers and employees to enterprises.In addition, the country's top leadership has followed the path of historically atypical expansion of the scope of judicial repression, which also applies to truants and those who are late for work.As a result, the enforcement of the decree of June 26, 1940 in the last pre-war year (until June 1941) acquired an absolutely unprecedented scale from the point of view of world history.It is concluded that the specified criminal law mechanism for

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.270 · 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