So-Called Experts: How American Consultants Remade the Canadian Civil Service, 1918-1921
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In his March 1997 speech to World Affairs Council in Los Angeles, Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy discussed changing nature of Canadian-American relationship. Axworthy stated that the world has experienced a geopolitical shift.... Countries are being forced to redefine their international relations. ... Nowhere is this process of redefinition more clear than our relationship with one another. Almost exact words could have been said by William Lyon Mackenzie King (until 1946 prime minister also held External Affairs portfolio) about altered nature of global politics at end of Second World War as United States and Soviet Union began to dominate international arena; or by Mitchell Sharp in 1972 after Trudeau government's adoption of third option policy in reaction to Nixon shock as Bretton Woods system came under revision by American administration; or by Joe Clark in 1989 after Mulroney government was re-elected with a renewed mandate (arguably) to implement free trade, Conservatives having spent their first mandate negotiating bilateral trade agreement with United States because of apparently increasing global protectionist trends. The point is that when foreign ministers talk about profound shifts and redefinitions in international relations, such talk must inevitably centre on country's relationship with United States.The pivotal importance of understanding Canadian-American relations quickly becomes obvious to any student of foreign policy. Trying to make sense of actions in international arena inevitably means attempting to come to grips with linkages between Ottawa and Washington. Given that study of foreign policy, according to William Wallace,(f.1) is a boundary problem in two respects: it is an area of politics bordering nation-state and its international environment, and it is a field of study embodying (at least) two academic disciplines, namely, study of domestic government and politics and study of international politics and diplomacy, how is this to be done? For those of us who have focussed our attention on international relations, Canadian-American relationship can be little understood from global events and trends that have become even more apparent with end of Cold War. Whether sharing similar ideological premises,(f.2) coming from same civilization,(f.3) or being equally subject to (or subjects of) McWofid,(f.4) Canada and United States are largely part of same entity called West, thus forcing us to question why it is that governments continue to pronounce and propagate view that Canada is unique (particularly vis-a-vis United States). The most recent manifestation of this can be found in Chretien government's foreign policy statement, Canada in World,(f.5) where along with two objectives of promoting prosperity and employment and of protecting security within a stable global framework, we find a third goal embraced by government: projecting and culture. Although it has been met with expected opposition from Bloc Quebecois who deplore interference in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction, particularly and education, and it has led even supporters of policy to argue that it is in of more budgetary commitment and operational preparation,(f.6) this third objective clearly assumes that there are Canadian values and a Canadian culture that government will remain vigilant in protecting and promoting ... to flourish in global environment.'What differentiates Canada from United States, and how do these differences affect Canadian-American relationship? Utilizing Wallace's observation about study of foreign policy, we need to cross academic disciplines and look at work of those who study domestic government and politics, particularly within a comparative context. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».