Excerpt from Brokering Belonging: Chinese in Canada’s Exclusion Era, 1885–1945
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brokering Belonging traces several generations of Chinese Canadian "brokers," the ethnic leaders who acted as intermediaries between the Chinese and Anglo worlds of Canada.Before the Second World War, many Chinese Canadians were illegal immigrants, and most could not vote. 1 Brokers therefore played an informal but necessary role as representatives of their community to the larger society during a period of anti-Asian sentiment and exclusion.Using new Chinese language evidence, my investigation of dramatic power struggles shows how Chinese immigrants became significant players in race relations and had an impact on policies that affected all Canadians and Americans.Chinese brokers' work offers a transnational perspective on the process of political integration.Most studies of foreign migrants' political integration focus on immigrants who could eventually become citizens. 2While this was the norm for European immigrants, policies in Canada and the United States did not allow Asian immigrants equal access to voting and naturalization privileges. 3 Chinese brokers' use of power also reflected their roles as representatives of a migrant community that stretched across Canada, China, and the United States.Commonly, immigrant leadership has been conceived as domination of naive new arrivals by English-speaking merchants, labor contractors, interpreters, and professionals. 4 Brokering Belonging conceives of transnational migrants' integration into settler societies
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".