Canadian Civil-Military Relations in the Early “Command Era,” 1945-1955 Forging a Normative Prescription Through Rational Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
recent postwar demobilisation.2Through the 1950s, Canada grew its armed forces from 30,000 to 120,000 regulars, fought a hot war in Korea, deployed a standing garrison to Europe under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (n a t o ), joined the North American Air Defence (n o r a d ) umbrella, led the United Nations' first large peacekeeping mission in the wake of the Suez Crisis, all the while developing massive infrastructures on its home soil to support an unprecedented peacetime mobilisation.3This stands in sharp contrast to the "Management Era", deemed to have taken hold in 1964, sublimating the previous harmony through controversial innovations, the most well-known being Defence Minister Paul Hellyer's plan to first integrate and then unify Canada's three fighting services.4In Bland's view, the politician left his successors with "... an organization in great confusion, a military profession unsure of its values, its history, or its future, and with the old problems still firmly in place."5While an indictment of Hellyer the minister, this last statement also intimates that not all was well prior to 1964.The government of Progressive Conservative Prime Minister John Diefenbaker had fallen to the Liberals of Lester Pearson in 1963 largely as a result of its inability to resolve defence dilemmas since taking power in 1957.6Neither Pearson nor Hellyer intended for such a fate to befall them and many observers have since linked unification to problems that 1 0 4 : F o r g in g A N o r m a t iv e P r e s c r ip t io n T h r o u g h R a t io n a l A n a ly s i s 2 See, among others, George F.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".