When Democratic Socialists Discovered Democracy: The League for Social Reconstruction Confronts the 'Quebec Problem'
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the midst of the disorienting 1930s, Canadian socialists were at the forefront of attempts to define both the nation and its people. When the League for Social Reconstruction ( LSR ) emerged as the first group of socialist academics in Canada, it linked its goal of replacing the capitalist system with the full realization of the potentials of Canadian nationhood. Although historians have extensively studied the LSR , the challenge that French-Canadian nationalism posed to its national program has been largely ignored. For the League's Montreal members in particular, surrounded on all sides by Quebec's French-speaking majority, the importance of the social and political conditions of Quebec became centrally important to the shaping of their ideology. The fear of Quebec fascism caused many LSR Montreal members to redefine their political strategy, reaffirm their belief in civil liberties, and ultimately reinvent the very meaning that they attributed to social democracy. En plein c�ur de la d�route des ann�es 1930, les socialistes canadiens occupaient le premier plan parmi ceux qui cherchaient � d�finir la nation et son peuple. Lors de son �mergence en tant que premier regroupement d'universitaires socialistes au Canada, la League for Social Reconstruction (LSR) relia son objectif visant � remplacer au pays le syst�me capitaliste � la r�alisation du plein potentiel de l'existence du Canada en tant que nation. Bien que les historiens aient examin� � fond la LSR, le d�fi pos� par le nationalisme franco-canadien au programme national de la LSR a �t� en grande partie ignor�. En particulier, pour les membres montr�alais de la ligue, encercl�s par la majorit� francophone du Qu�bec, l'importance des conditions sociales et politiques du Qu�bec devint un enjeu majeur dans la formation de leur id�ologie. La crainte d'un fascisme qu�b�cois amena nombre de membres montr�alais de la LSR � red�finir leur strat�gie politique, � r�affirmer leur croyance dans les libert�s fondamentales, et, en fin de compte, � r�inventer la signification m�me qu'ils attribuaient � la social-d�mocratie.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".