JEWS AND UKRAINIANS IN CANADA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DIASPORA-HOMELAND RELATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A relatively neglected area of inquiry in the field of ethnic relations is the impact of homeland events and relations on diaspora communities, and, indeed, on interminority relations in those diasporas. This essay rep resents a case study of diaspora homeland relations as these have affected Ukrainians and Jews in Canada. The nature of these relations in Canada to day is a product of socio-demographic characteristics of the two communi ties, the real and perceived legacy of historical relations which existed in Ukraine, and contemporary events in both Israel and Ukraine. This paper is rooted in a lengthy study of Ukrainian-Jewish rela tions in Canada, in the context of the government commission of inquiry on Nazi war criminals, established in 1985, and which reported in 1987. The Ukrainian and Jewish polities in Canada are high profile, with interesting differences and similarities in the character of rela tions to Ukraine and Israel, respectively. In addition, homeland events affect interethnic relations of interacting diaspora communities. For Ukrainians, the homeland is Ukraine, and it remains operative in idealized form, given Ukraine's status as a captive nation, which has never enjoyed true political independence. (The short-lived repub lic of 1917-1920 was never fully stabilized.) Jews in Canada enjoy two homelands ? their country of ancestral origin and, primarily, Israel. Israel is the adopted homeland of all di aspora Jews ? and is a real homeland, enjoying political independence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".