Authoritarian Populism and Canada’s Conservative Decade (2006–2015) in Citizenship and Immigration: The Politics and Practices of <i>Kenneyism</i> and <i>Neo-conservative Multiculturalism</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Focused on the politics and policies of citizenship, immigration, and multiculturalism in Canada, this article employs the concepts of Kenneyism (Kenney-ism, named after Jason Kenney, Canada’s prominent former minister of citizenship, immigration, and multiculturalism) and neo-conservative multiculturalism to reconcile the Conservative Party of Canada’s long-term outreach efforts aiming to incorporate many new, ethnicized, and racialized Canadians into a “minimum winning coalition” with the exclusionary policies and creative discourses the party espoused and implemented during its time in office, 2006–2015. As forms of politics that Stuart Hall termed authoritarian populism, the emphasis on the “authoritarian” dimension of conservative populism foregrounds the often anti-democratic nature of the project both symbolically and substantively. This article outlines the roots of Kenneyism and neo-conservative multiculturalism within a discussion of the party’s evolution from its Reform and Alliance Party predecessors. It discusses five key characteristics and trends of the party’s political and governmental approach that demonstrate both their creative outreach and forms of disciplinary politics and social exclusion—particularly but not only with respect to Muslims, refugees, and temporary foreign workers. It concludes with reflections on the party’s record and the future of Kenneyism as a form of politics after the party’s 2015 electoral defeat and 2017 leadership contest.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.049 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".