MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097841904 · doi:10.29173/cjs4422

Dominique Clement, Canada's Rights Revolution: Social Movement and Social Change, 1937–82.

2008· article· en· W2097841904 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Howard Ramos

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Sociology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyMovement (music)Social movementSocial changeSocial scienceMedia studiesPolitical scienceLawAestheticsPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dominique Clement, Canada's Rights Revolution: Social Movements and Social Change, 1937-82. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2008, 296 pp. $32.95 paper (978-0-7748-1480-5), $85.00 hardcover (978-0-7748-1479-9) Canada's Rights Revolution is an ambitious book on the history of Canadian civil liberty and human rights advocacy over the 1937-1982 period. It grapples with a number of key issues facing social movements, including generational differences among activists, ideological tensions, and the struggle to launch national bodies. Most interesting is its critical engagement of the role of federal government funding in Canadian mobilization. The book's early chapters introduce readers to concepts that frame the rest of the analysis. These include understandings of negative versus positive rights, differences between civil liberty and human rights advocacy, and generational shifts between early campaigns seeking antidiscrimination for particular groups versus later ones fighting for the universal legal entrenchment of individual and socioeconomic and cultural rights. Clement argues that early generations of rights activists faced an uphill battle against the Canadian state, which branded many as radicals or communists, and repressed their organizations as a result. The government was reluctant to abandon Parliamentary supremacy in protecting the rights of Canadians, which accordingly generated harsh divisions with the movement between leftists and liberals. Despite these tensions, the book argues that through fighting discriminatory practices early advocates were successful in gaining rights legislation that protected negative rights, or those relating to civil and political liberties. Thus, early rights activists were essentially civil libertarians. Human rights activism and broader conceptions of rights, seeking to protect positive rights, did not fully emerge until the late 1960s and peaked during the 1970s. Clement notes a generational shift from earlier advocacy, seen in the emergence of new organizations and a younger generation of activists. They sought more than just civil and political equality, instead looking to protect group rights, such as language, and demanding that the state protect socioeconomic and cultural minorities. The new generation had unprecedented political opportunities to mobilize as a consequence of Canadian nation-state building, which saw increased resources distributed by the federal Secretary of State, geared to building a stronger Canadian civil society. They also had new institutional forums open to their advocacy, such as the courts. …

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of SociologySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207