Remote control: a history of the regulation of religion in the Canadian public square
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The modern Canadian state is secular, but it is not a neutral state. It is a liberal democracy in which the prevailing value system has shifted. The shift has been from a culture in which a commonly held religion was accorded a special place in the development of law and custom, to a culture in which religious pluralism is recognized and an institutionalized secularism obtains. The assumption would be that this would betoken a new tolerance for diversity, and in some ways it does. In other ways, the modern state behaves with an understanding of pluralism that is just as consensus oriented as the Protestant Culture that dominated in Canada until the middle of the twentieth century, and with the same illiberal tendencies. In historical terms, the effect that can be charted is one of repeating hegemonies, where respect for freedom of conscience or religion remains an incomplete ideal. How do we assess respect for religious freedom? One way is through an evaluation of the developing jurisprudence in the manifold areas in public life where religious freedom is contested. Another is through an exploration of one of these contested facets of the public square. That is what this dissertation attempts to provide. The case study is that of broadcasting: more specifically, the regulation of religious broadcasting in Canada from the time that it began until the last decade of the twentieth century. For explaining the Canadian historical approach to religion, it benefits from an easy comparison with the United States, where a very different set of circumstances evolved. John Moir once characterized Canadian religion since its disestablishment in the mid nineteenth century as that of a “legally disestablished religiosity”. In contradistinction from the United States, the implication is of a greater level of control over religious expression. For the purposes of this dissertation, it is an apt description for how and why the state has alternately suppressed, supported and enjoined Canadian religion in an important area of public life, one whose span straddles the shift from a Christian to a secular culture. In the regulation of broadcasting, both public and private, we see that the management of religious expression has worked from the start to affirm the dominant religious prejudices of the majority of Canadians. Our case study also suggest that such privileging was managed through the advice and support of the mainline churches. It suggests that the discourse of “balance” through which broadcasting was controlled, particularly since the decade of the nineteen sixties, constituted a self-serving defense of discriminatory regulation. As well, the case study provides an argument for the existence of a Canadian civic religion of nation building, for the idea that this civic religion is as old as European settlement itself, and for the promise that in recognizing its existence we can move beyond a pattern in our past of marginalizing non-conforming value systems and those who hold them. This paper operates on three levels. On one level it provides an historical argument for the idea that the modern liberal state is repeating the practices of hegemonic value systems of the past. On another level it provides a philosophical argument that this cycle is fed by the assumption that a healthy public arena is empty of irreconcilable views, and that this idea sustains a perpetual inability of the mainstream to respect true diversity in first order questions. Finally, it is a case study in one area of the Canadian public square—radio and television broadcasting—through which the merits of both of these points can be evaluated.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,023 | 0,033 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».