So-Called Experts: How American Consultants Remade the Canadian Civil Service, 1918-1921
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".