MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Surviving the Americanizing New Right*

2000· article· fr· W1987381315 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gordon Laxer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2000
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNationalismDemocracyLiberalismHumanitiesEthosPolitical scienceGlobalizationEthnologyState (computer science)SociologyLawArtPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Benjamin Barber établit un lien entre la mondialisation des entre‐prises et la résurgence des nationalismes ethnoculturels. Selon lui, ces deux phénomènes affaiblissent la démocratie. Barber ne parle pas des effets de la mondialisation sur l'autre aspect du nationalisme — le nationalisme civique, Aetatisé, qui prédomine dans les démo‐craties comme le Canada. Cet article étudie les liens qui unissent ethos , traditions et État au Canada, et qui en font un pays différent des États‐Unis. L'auteur se demande si le nouveau libéralisme de droite des années 1980 et 1990 n'a pas remis en question le caractère distinct du Canada. L'article présente aussi les tendances qui s'opposent à la nouvelle droite libérale au Canada. Benjamin Barber draws a connection between corporate globalization and the resurgence of ethno‐cultural nationalisms. Both weaken democracy, he contends. Barber does not discuss the effects of globalization on the other variety of nationalism—the civic, state‐based kind that predominates in highly diverse, democratic countries such as Canada. This paper examines the state‐based ethos and traditions that have kept Canada distinct from the United States and explores whether the new right liberalism of the 1980s and 1990s has eroded Canada's raison d'etre as a separate country. Counter trends to new right liberalism in Canada are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207