Racisme et antiracisme au Québec. Discours et déclinaisons by Micheline Labelle (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Racisme et antiracisme au Québec. Discours et déclinaisons by Micheline Labelle Maryse Potvin Micheline Labelle . Racisme et antiracisme au Québec. Discours et déclinaisons. Montréal : Presses de l'Université du Québec, 2010. 212 pp. $29.00 sc. This book purports to offer an analysis of the Québec state's discourse on racism and anti-racism, as well as the position adopted by a few NGOs and citizens who submitted briefs to the 2006 public consultation on the government policy project designed to fight against racism. The book reviews numerous extracts from these "discourses," found in various public policies and briefs. The author's main objective is to "question the soundness of certain agreed-upon (conventional) ways to approach the problem in Quebec" (158). Despite the book's attractive title and objectives, it exhibits important flaws and omissions, three of which are, in my view, significant: 1. The first one is the lack of conceptual framework for "discourse analysis," in a work that proposes to analyze "discourses" on racism and anti-racism. "Discourse analysis" covers a vast multidisciplinary field, that comprises numerous approaches and theoretical debates (Foucault's theory on discourse, Habermas's discourse ethics, etcetera). 2. The second one is the book's ambition to cover "the Quebec State's discourse" during the 2000s—the "State" comprises many levels of government, normative powers (executive, legislative, judicial), institutions and actors—while it only analyzes the "governmental discourse," from a few recent provincial policies. Hence, one can question the book's choice of ministries and institutions, of NGOs and citizens, because there is no justification of the selection criteria. Why were the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Health excluded, given that they have adopted policies that concern racism and anti-racism? Why exclude the discourse of intellectuals, of researchers or even that of the media surrounding the 2006 consultation? Why limit one's analysis to 29 briefs out of 124, when the author submits, in conclusion, that a "strong consensus emanated from all 124 briefs" (157)? [End Page 237] Consequently, there are astonishing omissions regarding the problematization of racism and anti-racism in Quebec. When the author describes the issues and theoretical debates, she fails not only to mention the issues that arise from ethnic and power relationships specific to the Québécois context, but also the issues that are specific to Quebec research on this question. The author's survey of the literature, focused on American and European documentation, cannot provide the theoretical and historical context in Quebec, and the international issues, although relevant, cannot shed light on the reasons underlying the different positions that emanate from the various "discourses" in Quebec, nor on how they were expressed. Labelle fails to mention the views expressed by Quebec researchers since the 2000s concerning the government's discourse, especially recent analysis that puts into perspective the strengths and weaknesses of the government's discourse on racism (e.g., Marhraoui, McAndrew, Potvin). A more inclusive reading of research in Quebec would have allowed her to avoid certain misleading statements on "the authors" (which ones?) who, she states, analyze neo-racism while negating social representations that are linked to colonial racism, who confuse anti-racism and managing diversity, who adopt an overly extensive (or intersectional) approach. Rather than being diachronic, the analysis is synchronic. The work contains no in-depth analysis of the situation "before" and "after" the 2006 public consultation (for example: the Quebec government's discourse at the time of the Durban World Conference of 2001, and as it is now, following the Bouchard-Taylor report, in the Immigration Ministry's (MICC) 2008 policy). On a larger scale, it would have been preferable to put into perspective the meaning of the 2006 public consultation and the issues involved, with regards to various "discourses." These discourses (including the racist discourse), in particular during recent events that have greatly influenced Quebec, notably the "reasonable accommodation" crisis, cannot be ignored in any reflection on racism in Quebec. Some other assertions are also misleading: the author submits that the publication of a document on racism by the Conseil des Relations interculturelles in 2001 "placed the debate...
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 | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 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) | 0,003 | 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 ».