Les légitimités des revendications nationalistes: l'exemple du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionDemocratie et nationalisme… Ces deux concepts peuvent-ils aller de pair ou sont-ils exclusifs l'un de l'autre ? Pris abstraitement, ils ne permettent pas de se prononcer, car chacun leur donne le sens qu'il desire. Seule une etude de la realite basee sur des cas concrets peut eclairer le scientifique qui se forgera alors une opinion de maniere empirique. Dans cette perspective, le nationalisme quebecois qui tend a realiser la secession de la Belle Province de l'Etat canadien constitue un objet de reflexion pertinent. Les souverainistes, comme on les appelle, sont-ils vraiment des democrates ? Afin de repondre a cette question ou, du moins, de decouvrir des indices allant dans un sens ou dans l'autre, differents themes vont etre abordes. Apres l'origine et le developpement du nationalisme quebecois, les ambiguites du discours souverainiste au sujet des avantages de la secession, de la question referendaire, de la legalite et legitimite d'une eventuelle secession, ainsi que de l'indivisibilite du territoire quebecois, seront abordees. Ensuite, la position souverainiste quant aux francophones hors Quebec et quant aux differents types de minorites se trouvant sur le sol quebecois sera etudiee, avant que, in fine, la question de savoir si la communaute internationale serait prete a reconnaitre un Quebec independant soit evoquee. 1. L'origine et le developpement du nationalisme quebecoisSi l'Eglise catholique ne s'etait demenee jusqu'au milieu du XXeme siecle
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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; 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".