New Directions in Saskatchewan Public Policy/Remaining Loyal: Social Democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan
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
McGrane, David P. (Ed.). New Directions in Saskatchewan Public Policy. Regina, Canada: CPRC Press, University of Regina, 2011David McGrane Remaining Loyal: Democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan Montreal & Kingston, London, Ithaca: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2014David McGrane is an associate professor of political studies at St. Thomas More College, University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, Canada. Over course of three years, he published two books on Saskatchewan and Quebec (Canadian provinces) social democratic politics in (McGrane, 2011, 2014), a considerable accomplishment. This research on Saskatchewan and Quebec social democratic governments is important to students of public sector innovation because these provinces have often been most innovative in Canada (see also, for example, Glor, 1997, 2002 in which I identify 159 innovations of Saskatchewan government of 1971-82). This suggest ideology may be important to innovation.McGrane 's Remaining Loyal: Democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan examines ideology of social democratic parties and governments in Quebec and Saskatchewan. He argues (1) that Saskatchewan Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) and its successor, New Democratic Party were and remain social democratic parties, and that Rassemblement pour l'independence nationale (RIN) from 1963 and Parti Quebecois (PQ) from 1968 in Quebec were and are social democratic parties (page 64), (2) that third way successors to traditional social democratic parties in Quebec and Saskatchewan are social democratic parties; and (3) that while Quebec's political culture may not be consistently social democratic, Saskatchewan's political culture has been, although this may be in process of changing (page 246). In making these assertions, McGrane takes on several of major controversies in Canadian and social democratic politics in Canada and internationally.McGrane's claims hinge on his definition of social democracy. He distinguishes between Fabian theory and that of Eduard Bernstein, a German who spent time with Fabians in United Kingdom. His first distinction is between Fabians' and Bernstein's definitions of social democracy. The key to this difference is his understanding of Fabians' sense of evolution in history as being inevitable, gradual and irreversible and Bernstein's as not being inevitable, nor as having a fixed, final goal. McGrane adopts latter perspective-social democracy is the implementation of a certain set of principles by a group of determined reformers whose specific goals vary by time and place (McGrane, 2014: 19)-and concludes Social democracy should not be seen as a fixed set of policies then, but rather a set of values (p. 206).1McGrane makes a second distinction between Fabians and Bernstein, namely, their approach to democracy and rights. The Fabians favour democracy because it is a mechanism to achieve socialist reforms, but Bernstein understands democracy as both means and end: it is means to achieve socialism and it is form in which socialism will be achieved. Bernstein's idea of democracy includes justice, defined as equality of rights including minority rights, and limits on rule of majority. He sees social democracy as heir to liberalism but as adopting a higher ideal, because it guarantees civil, social and economic democracy.Unlike in Europe, in Canada affiliation with labour movement was not very important (pages 29-30), nor was class politics in emergence of social democracy in Saskatchewan and Quebec. In fact, small farmers were a much more important political constituency in Saskatchewan. Even more important was development of social movements that provided an acceptable context and legitimacy for government intervention in economy after World War II. The economy, political institutions, and political agents were also important (page 165). …
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 | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 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