From Race to Religion? The Changing Philosophies of Integration in France and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Western societies increasingly fear the retreat of secularism that they believe is caused by migrants’ presence within their borders. In this new postsecular context, the public regulation of religious practices, especially regarding Islam, has become a prominent issue. One can claim that it has displaced issues of ethnic discriminations and structural racism, which used to frame debates about redistribution and recognition up until the 1990s. This profound change is reshaping political models of migrants and minorities’ integration in very different contexts. Models as different as the French Republican model and the Canadian multiculturalist model have both made substantive changes in how they regulate religious practices. In this global context, religious affiliation tends to obscure issues of ethnicity. To make sense of this complex evolution, this paper compares two recent controversies, the headscarf debate in France and the “sharia courts” debate in Ontario, Canada. It argues that, in both cases, exceptional sets of laws, breaking with traditional notions of secularism, are put in place in order to “regulate” Islam and ethnicity.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 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".