Social Democracy in Twentieth Century Canada: An Interpretive Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.Social democracy changed over the course of the twentieth century in relation to changes in the structure of Canada's economy, society and state. In the following article, we advance a framework to interpret and understand this process of change, identifying four major periods in the development of social democracy: Social Gospel (1900–1925), Social Planning (1925–1950), Social Security (1950–1975) and Social Movements (1975–2000). These periods are neither exclusive nor rigidly drawn, but they are instructive in explaining the development of Canada's left-wing political tradition. Situating social democracy within the framework of Canada's political economy and intra-party debates, and also in an international and historical context, we trace the transition from a moral crusade against capitalism to the seasoned, yet vulnerable, electoralism of the contemporary NDP. Résumé.La social-démocratie a évolué au cours du 20esiècle, en même temps que la structure de l'économie, de la société et de l'État canadien. Dans l'article ci-dessous, nous proposons un cadre pour interpréter et comprendre ce processus en décrivant quatre périodes majeures dans le développement de la social-démocratie : l'Évangile social (1900–1925), la planification sociale (1925–1950), la sécurité sociale (1950–1975) et les mouvements sociaux (1975–2000). Ces périodes ne sont ni exclusives ni rigides, mais elles aident à expliquer le développement de la tradition politique de gauche au Canada. En situant la social-démocratie dans le cadre de l'économie politique canadienne et des débats intrapartis, ainsi que dans un contexte international et historique, nous traçons la transition de la croisade morale contre le capitalisme à l'électoralisme chevronné mais vulnérable du NPD contemporain.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".