Restricting Rights, Losing Control: The Politics of Control over Asylum Seekers in Liberal-Democratic States—Lessons from the Canadian Case, 1951–1989
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Since the 1990s, a prevalent theme in the comparative literature on liberal–democratic state responses to increasing international migration holds that the expansion of rights protections for non-citizens has undermined restrictive border control policies. The argument presented in this article suggests that this is too partial an understanding of the ways in which control and rights intersect—the control–rights nexus . Accordingly, it analyzes Canadian policies towards asylum seekers from the 1950s to the 1980s to explore the ways in which the restriction of rights can undermine state control policies by generating rights-based politics, encouraging the circumvention of control policies and creating administrative inefficiencies. Altogether, the analysis provides an important refinement of the study of the control–rights nexus and allows for a more complete understanding of control policies and politics in liberal–democratic states. Résumé. Depuis les années 1990, un thème répandu dans la littérature comparative sur les réponses des États libéraux démocratiques à la croissance de la migration internationale soutient que l'extension de la protection des droits des non-citoyens a compromis les politiques restrictives de contrôle des frontières. L'argument présenté dans cet article suggère que ce thème offre une compréhension trop partielle de la dynamique d'intersection du contrôle et des droits – le control-rights nexus . En conséquence, il analyse les politiques canadiennes envers les demandeurs d'asile depuis les années 1950 jusqu'aux années 1980 pour explorer les manières dont la restriction des droits peut miner les politiques de contrôle de l'État en générant des politiques de droits, en encourageant le contournement des politiques de contrôle et en créant des lourdeurs administratives. En somme, l'analyse apporte une mise au point importante à l'étude de cet enjeu et permet une compréhension plus complète des politiques de contrôle et de la politique dans les États libéraux démocratiques.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".