Cultural Myths and Political Realities or Why Québec Will Never Separate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEn surface, la division politique et culturelle entre le Quebec et l'Ouest canadien semble tres grave. Toutefois, pour Barry Cooper, le serieux de la situation a ete grandement exagere. A travers une analyse du rapport de Lord Durham, Cooper demontre pourquoi le Quebec ne se separera pas et que dans le cas, ou un jour, il deviendrait independant, cela ne ferait aucune difference pour le Canada. La realite politique, economique et d'affaires ne laisse pas entrevoir le meme fosse. Le Quebec a enregistre d'enormes succes au sein de la Federation en jouant le jeu d'une societe liberale. Or, pour que le Quebec devienne vraiment une menace pour le Canada, il faudrait qu'il se transforme en societe non-liberale. Il n'y a aucun indice qu'une telle transformation est en place. Par consequent, la menace des souverainistes est exageree. EnglishCultural conflict in liberal societies always looks much more serious than it ever actually becomes. Certainly the cultural conflict between Quebec and western Canada looks grave indeed. One could say as much, however, about the cultural conflict between the west and the east, and the east, in the eyes of westerners, includes Quebec. Indeed, the east occupies the same symbolic space in the mythology of the west as English-Canada does in Quebec. The political reality — to say nothing of economics and business — is another matter. It is characterized in liberal societies as a realm of negotiation and compromise, of deal-making. Quebec has enjoyed enormous success in its political achievements and will doubtless continue to do so. The only conditions under which Quebec could seriously threaten Canada's political stability would entail a transformation of a liberal society in that province into a hostile and distinctly anti-liberal one. There is no evidence that such a transformation is under way. Accordingly, threats by sovereignists are, and will continue to be, a strenuous and assertive form of bargaining.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".