MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2082274312 · doi:10.1353/utq.2012.0105

Technology and Nationalism (review)

2012· article· en· W2082274312 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Edward Andrew

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNationalismPolitical scienceEconomic historyLawPolitical economySociologyHistoryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Technology and Nationalism Edward Andrew (bio) Marco Adria. Technology and Nationalism. McGill-Queen’s University Press. viii, 208. $90.00, $29.95 Marco Adria teaches communications and technology at the University of Alberta and has written an interesting book on his subject from the perspective of his region. After surveying the academic literature on nationalism, Adria focuses on the missile crisis of 1962, when the Diefenbaker government refused to acquiesce in the demand of the Kennedy government to have unlimited access for American bombers armed with nuclear weapons to fly over Canadian airspace during the Cuban Missile Crisis. George Grant’s defence of Diefenbaker, coupled with his opposition to the Vietnam War, occasioned Grant’s Lament for a Nation, which stimulated thought about the meaning and possibility of nationalism in Canada. Adria does not discuss Grant’s view that liberalism is the doctrine most suitable to technological and imperial expansion but cites Ramsay Cook and Jill Vickers saying that Grant’s defence of Diefenbaker was really a defence of ‘Anglo-Saxon civilization’ and omits Grant’s central criticism of Diefenbaker – namely, that ‘Canada was predicated on the rights of nations as well as on the rights of individuals’ and that Diefenbaker’s failure to see this fact about the multinational state of Canada ‘showed himself to be a liberal rather than a conservative.’ To be sure, Grant’s conservatism was the antithesis of the present government, formed from the right-wing Albertan Reform and Canadian Alliance parties. Grant was opposed to the National Energy Policy providing cheaper energy to central Canadians at the [End Page 671] expense of Albertans, but the economic nationalism of the Trudeau years perhaps had its source in the Liberal Party being stung by Grant’s claim that it had transformed Canada into a branch plant of the United States. Readers might consult Darin Barney’s Prometheus Wired (2000), a source surprisingly absent in Adria’s bibliography, to find out why Grant accepted Heidegger’s view we are used by technology – used up as human resources, like natural resources – not independent of technology to use it as we will. Adria’s view that ‘Heidegger’s philosophic hermeneutics was for Grant a means through which the timeless truths and values of the world could be viewed’ is preposterous, as is manifest in Dennis Lee’s ‘Grant’s Impasse’ in By Loving Our Own (1990). Lee demonstrated why Grant found Heidegger’s thorough historicism so powerful that any access to eternity was problematic, and both Heidegger and Grant thought that to refer to art, philosophy, and religion as values is ‘subjectivizing’ of what is worthy of our attention and robs the highest of human endeavours of their dignity. Adria has interesting chapters on the tension between regionalism and nationalism in Canada and on the role of radio in developing national and regional identities. Albertans have an identity which is distinctive but is not national, like that of the Québécois. He compares Ned Corbett’s promotion of both an educated citizenry and Canadian nationalism in CKUA in Alberta and the CBC with William Aberhart’s broadcasting of his Prophetic Bible Institute, which promoted Social Credit and Albertans’ awareness that they were ripped off by eastern financial institutions. Although Adria distinguishes deliberative democracy and an educative function of radio and television from the packaging of prejudices to please an audience that does not want to be provoked to thought (as talk radio or in Fox or Sun News), and although he recognizes that Corbett was contemptuous of Aberhart’s bombast, Adria finds much in common between Corbett’s and Aberhart’s methods and objectives. Adria concludes with a stimulating chapter on the Internet and the future. He sees ‘the hyperpluralistic and fragmented’ character of Internet technologies as countering nationalism with both global and local concerns, linking new Canadians with the cultures of their homelands and the diaspora communities around the world, and thus thinks the Internet particularly suits the Canadian polity with the divergent attachments and loyalties of its citizens. Canada is an increasingly non-violent and tolerant society. As one watches the youth texting one another across dinner tables, one imagines that, for them, nothing...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.009

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→