Stephen Harper, Leo Strauss et la politique de la peur
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article compare les idées politiques de Stephen Harper avec celles du philosophe politique controversé Leo Strauss. Il se concentre sur leur peur partagée des Nations Unies, utilisant la pensée de Strauss, plus pénétrante et systématique, pour clarifier les présupposés fondamentaux qui expliqueraient l’attitude de Harper à l’égard de l’onu. Le premier de ces présupposés est que le soutien des nations occidentales à l’onu est un symptôme de la faible volonté d’un libéralisme incapable d’affronter ses ennemis. Par ailleurs, le présupposé selon lequel c’est précisément par l’affrontement avec un ennemi mortel que l’État-nation peut retrouver sa santé morale et politique est tout aussi important. Ces idées, avance l’auteur, aident à expliquer une période en politique étrangère canadienne qui fut marquée par des relations notoirement tendues avec l’onu et une préoccupation constante pour la menace terroriste.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".