The October Crisis of 1970: Human Rights Abuses Under the <i>War Measures Act</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an attempt to revisit and stimulate debate on the long-term ramifications of the October Crisis, the following essay examines the crisis from a unique perspective: human rights. The literature on the crisis, particularly in English, is dominated by political histories and testimonials, as well as assumptions surrounding the public’s response to the use of emergency powers. Such accounts fail to convey the complex reaction to the use of the War Measures Act in peacetime. The author argues that the crisis was not limited to Quebec and Ottawa, and that the War Measures Act was responsible for extensive human rights abuses across the country. Moreover, the abuses committed under the act engendered a small but vocal opposition across the country. The essay begins by placing the crisis in the context of radical social protest movements and police abuses of individual rights in the 1960s, followed by a detailed account of the crisis and human rights abuses. The final section explores the long-term implications of the crisis.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".