Une rupture sans fin: la mémoire contestée de la perestroïka en Russie / A never-ending rupture: the contested memory of perestroika in Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contemporary Russia, perestroika - the reforms led by Mikhail Gorbachev between 1985 and 1991 - is often seen as synonymous with chaos and the collapse of the state. Yet this article shows that this period remains a contested collective memory, where it symbolizes an unfinished past, a bearer of present-day hopes and fears. In contrast to the widely condemned 1990s, perestroika provokes heated debate against a backdrop of weak state commitment to this legacy. Presidents Putin and Medvedev have avoided taking a stand, leaving room in the political and media spheres for fierce memory wars aimed at “continuing,” “repeating” or “avoiding” the repetition of perestroika, as a model or counter-model for expected or feared reforms. Résumé Dans la Russie contemporaine, la perestroïka, réformes menées par Mikhail Gorbatchev entre 1985 et 1991, est souvent perçue comme synonyme de chaos et d’effondrement de l’État. Pourtant, cet article montre que cette période reste une mémoire collective contestée, où elle symbolise un passé inachevé, porteur d’espoirs et de craintes actuelles. Contrairement aux années 1990, largement condamnées, la perestroïka suscite des débats houleux dans un contexte de faible engagement de l’État sur cet héritage. Les présidents Poutine et Medvedev évitent de prendre position, laissant place dans les sphères politiques et médiatiques à des luttes mémorielles féroces visant à « poursuivre », « répéter » ou « éviter » la répétition de la perestroïka, en tant que modèle ou contre-modèle des réformes attendues ou redoutées.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".