Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the changing policy and legal frameworks governing migration from China to Canada from 1949 to 1967. The transition period between exclusion and universal access was characterized by slow and contested change, as the Canadian state persistently resisted pressure from community actors and religious groups to facilitate the entry of Chinese migrants, concerned as it was with the domestic stability of the nation. By exploring the intersection of the campaign to expand family sponsorship rights for Chinese Canadians, led by the Chinese Benevolent Association in Vancouver, and church interest in refugee resettlement from Hong Kong in the 1960s, this article demonstrates the critical role that civil society actors played in effecting change in the face of entrenched suspicion about immigration from China and growing state intervention in all aspects of Canadian family life in the postwar period. The debates that took place over expanded family migration from China were rooted in a fundamental conflict between family reunification as a basic human right and the state’s desire to control the shape and character of the Canadian nation and suggest that the liberalization of Canada’s immigration system in the postwar period was far from certain. Cet article analyse l’évolution des politiques et du cadre juridique qui ont régi les migrations entre la Chine et le Canada de 1949 à 1967. La période de transition entre l’exclusion et l’accès universel en fut une de changements lents et contestés, alors que l’État canadien, soucieux de stabilité sur le plan intérieur, a continuellement résisté aux pressions d’acteurs de la communauté et de groupes religieux pour favoriser l’entrée de migrants chinois. Explorant l’intersection de la campagne menée par la Chinese Benevolent Association de Vancouver pour étendre aux Canadiens chinois le droit au parrainage de la famille, d’une part, et, de l’autre, l’intérêtdel’Église envers les réfugiés de Hong Kong dans les années 1960, cet article confirme le rôle critique qu’ont joué les acteurs de la société civile pour amener des changements devant la méfiance bien enracinée envers l’immigration chinoise et de l’intervention toujours plus grande de l’État dans tous les aspects de la vie des familles canadiennes au lendemain de la guerre. Les débats d’alors au sujet d’une plus grande migration familiale en provenance de Chine enracinent dans un conflit entre le droit fondamental à la réunion des familles et le désir de l’État de contrôler le visage et le caractère de la nation canadienne. Ces débats suggèrent que la libéralisation du système canadien d’immigration dans l’aprèsguerre n’alla pas de soi.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".