Ce que les ruines racontent d’une insurrection Morales du vol et de la violence au Burkina Faso pendant les journées insurrectionnelles des 30 et 31 octobre 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article revient sur les journées insurrectionnelles des 30 et 31 décembre 2014 qui ont précipité la chute de Blaise Compaoré au Burkina Faso, à travers les ruines matérielles qu’elles ont laissées dans l’espace urbain. Il vise à décrire précisément la violence de rue en lien avec son traitement politique et policier, à interroger les différentes morales dont cette violence est porteuse du point de vue des insurgés et à questionner ses mises en récit sélectives et rétrospectives, tant par ses protagonistes que par les autorités issues du renversement de régime. Cette déambulation parmi les ruines d’une insurrection invite à analyser les représentations populaires du pouvoir politique et économique sous le prisme de ce qui a été cassé ; elle engage également à explorer la pluralité des rationalités qui se révèlent dans la violence en situation insurrectionnelle ; elle amène enfin à réfléchir à l’usage des ruines et à la manière dont ces dernières peuvent s’insérer dans des politiques de la trace. What ruins say of an uprising. The morality of violence and lootings during the 30 and 31 october 2014 Uprising in Burkina Faso This article looks back at the insurrectionary days of 30 and 31 December 2014 that precipitated the fall of Blaise Compaoré in Burkina Faso, through the material traces they left behind in the urban space. It aims at describing precisely street violence in connection with the ways it was handled politically, as well as by the police, questioning the morality that this violence conveys from the insurgents’ perspective and exploring the ways in which it is narrated, not only by its protagonists but also by the new authorities who emerged after the insurrection. This wandering among the ruins invites to analyse the popular representations of political and economic power through the prism of what has been broken; it also calls to explore the plurality of rationalities that are revealed through insurrectionary violence; it finally leads to reflect on the political use of ruins and on how these can be inserted into politics of memory.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".