Marketing Canadian Pluralism in the International Arena
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ONE OF THE STATED GOALS of Canada's foreign policy is to promote a greater understanding and appreciation of values. Many of these values are in fact widely shared across the western democracies, if not around the world-e.g., human rights, peace, development, the environment. But some of these values are more distinctively Canadian. Foremost amongst these is the value of or pluralism. When Canadian politicians and diplomats act on the international stage, they often emphasize that is a defining characteristic of Canadian society and of Canadian identity. To understand Canada, it is said, one must understand the Canadian of diversity. Moreover, this is said to offer valuable lessons for other countries. While acknowledging that tensions remain amongst some of our ethnic, national, and linguistic groups, it is often suggested that Canadians have some special experience and expertise in accommodating diversity. We have some unique understanding of the benefits that can bring, and of the tools needed to manage in a non-violent and cooperative way. Sharing this understanding is one of Canada's major contributions to the international community.In this article, I will explore this discourse of a model of pluralism, and the way it is invoked in the international arena. I will begin by noting some of the ways in which the Canadian government promotes this discourse internationally and its various motives for doing so. I will then consider whether there really is anything distinctive about Canada's approach to diversity, and if so, whether it is successful and suitable for emulation elsewhere. While I support many aspects of Canada's approach to pluralism, I will argue that the government discourse on obscures as much as it reveals about the Canadian experience and its international relevance.PROMOTING THE CANADIAN MODEL ABROADIn various public speeches and documents, Canadian officials assert that Canada has been successful in accommodating diversity. By itself, this claim is not unusual. The government of every country wants the world to believe that its citizens form a harmonious society where the various ethnic, national, and linguistic groups respect each other's differences and get along well. Paeans to unity in diversity are ubiquitous when government officials speak in international contexts. These ritual pronouncements are not only intended to promote a positive and peaceful image of the country, but also to uphold the state's legitimacy. For a state to admit that some groups are excluded, oppressed, or rebellious would put in question the state's legitimate authority to speak for those groups in international contexts.While all countries claim to be harmonious, not all of them want this claim to be examined closely by the international community. In the Canadian case, however, these public pronouncements have been supplemented with efforts to encourage greater international knowledge of Canada's experience. The Canadian government actively funds academic research, conferences, and policy workshops that explore the international relevance of the model, including the Metropolis network on immigration, the Forum of Federations, and the International Council of Canadian Studies. All three of these initiatives provide financial incentives and logistical support for researchers and policy-makers in other countries to examine Canada as a of accommodating diversity. This is of course just a partial list. One could also mention various international contexts where the Canadian government presents itself as a world leader on indigenous issues, and encourages other countries to study its policies.1It might seem surprising that the Canadian government would spend so much time and effort encouraging people in other countries to study our policies on diversity, given that many of these policies are neither popular nor well-understood at home. …
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.
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 | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 découle