MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W237655297

Federation and National Identity in Canada and Australia: A Comparative Perspective. (Centenary of Federation Special)

2000· article· en· W237655297 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Kane, Haig Patapan

Bibliographic record

VenueMelbourne journal of politics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)MillDemocracyPoliticsNationalityNational identityIdentity (music)SociologyState (computer science)LawPolitical sciencePublic administrationImmigrationHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Can representative democratic government work where there exist significant and enduring differences of group identity? It is sometimes suggested that one of the answers to the tensions between politics and democracy might be the creation of federal structures. In this paper we use a comparative study of federation and in Canada and Australia to point to the possible limitations of federation as an institutional means of resolving such tensions. ********** John Smart Mill was the first to suggest, in Considerations on Representative Government, that federation might be an answer to the threat that as he termed it, posed to free institutions (Mill, 1972). Nationality has various causes for Mill, being the effect of race and descent, language, religion as well as the strongest cause, the identity of political antecedents (which includes community of recollections and the possession of a national history). Mill puts the problem in these terms: Free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. Among a people without fellow-feeling, especially if they read and speak different languages, the united public opinion, necessary to the working of representative government, cannot exist.... The same incidents, the same acts, the same system of government, affect [the different sections] in different ways; and each fears more injury to itself from the other than from the common arbiter, the state (Mill, 1972, 392). For Mill, race, religion, language, and generally nationality, are formidable obstacles to representative government. The grave implications of this observation become clearer when we recall that Mill regards representative government as the ideally best form of rule--only properly constituted representative institutions pursue the common good as well as advancing the moral, intellectual and active faculties of the people (1972, chs 3, 5). It is for this reason Mill states that is in general a necessary condition of free institutions that the boundaries of governments should coincide in the main with those of nationalities (1972, 394). Where this is not possible, Mill offers as one solution the merging or absorption of one nationality by another. (II) But when this proves impracticable and where the alternative of complete separation is impossible, Mill proposes federation as an arrangement which may preserve free institutions. The constitutional model for a federal government which he recommends, calling it exceedingly judicious, is that of the American Constitution. (III) In this essay we argue that this Millian theoretical perspective provides important insights into the different ways federalism was appropriated and deployed in Canada and Australia. More specifically, we claim that both the Canadian and Australian founders accepted Mill's view that `nationality' posed a threat to representative institutions and both adopted federation as a solution to the problem of nationality. But here the similarity ends. The Canadian founders did indeed adopt the Millian proposal of federation as a solution of the problem of `two races' (French Catholic and English Protestant). Federation was conceived in part as a means of securing the group rights and thus the separate identities of national minorities or `races' within an overarching `political identity' provided by a federal government. The Australian founders, in contrast, used federation not to accommodate and perpetuate separate identities, but to found a national government that would guarantee homogeneity by securing a singular `thick' national against the threat of incursion by `alien' races. (IV) CANADIAN AND AUSTRALIAN FOUNDINGS For both countries defence and economic union were important motivations for federating. Moves toward the British North America Act (BNA Act) of 1867 (renamed the Constitution Act in 1982) were a response to the threat that the American Civil War represented to the security of the provinces. …

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.013
Science and technology studies0.0350.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMelbourne journal of politics→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→