New Left, not New Liberal: 1960s Movements in English Canada and Quebec*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les données tirées d'carune enquête auprès de 471 des principaux militants et militantes du Québec et du Canada anglais pendant les années soixante confirment des hypothèses qui contredisent fortement les prédictions sur la nature des mouvements sociaux depuis 1960 basées sur la théorie des New Social Movements. l'auteur propose la construction d'carune nouvelle théorie postmarxiste des mouvements sociaux fondée sur la reconnaissance du fait que, depuis 1960, l'aile gauche des mouvements sociaux a continué d'carêtre une vraie gauche et non un nouveau genre de libéralisme. Data from a survey of 471 leading 1960s activists in Quebec and English Canada confirm hypotheses that strongly contradict predictions about the nature of post‐1960 movements derived from the New Social Movements theory. It is argued that a new approach to developing a post‐Marxist theory of social movements is needed, starting from a recognition that the politics of the left wing of post‐1960 movements are “new left,” not “new liberal.”
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".