A turning point in Sino–Canadian relations: 1968 and the favourable political climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the key domestic conundrums which led to the possibility of rapprochement between Canada and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Design/methodology/approach Adopting a “low politics” approach which emphasizes on individual actors and domestic issues that led to Sino–Canadian rapprochement, this paper draws from both primary and secondary sources which include archives and various historical documents to examine domestic socio-political and economic factors that led to the improved relations between the two states. Findings Sino–Canadian rapprochement was, on the one hand, the result of an increase in liberal activism and intensive socio-political change during the Quiet Revolution in Quebec (where public opinions mattered for federal party leaders) as a consequence of the collapse of ultra-conservative and anti-communist policies under the Duplessis era. Meanwhile, the PRC’s worsening economic situation as a result of the Cultural Revolution and Sino-Soviet tensions of 1968 placed China in a desperate situation to seek foreign aid. With the emergence of Pierre Trudeau’s era and Zhou Enlai’s diplomatic expertise, a further dialogue emerged which subsequently led to the normalization of relations in 1970. Originality/value Usually Canadian scholars studying China regarded 1970 as the watershed in Sino–Canadian relations, but this paper is going to illustrate that even two years before the diplomatic rapprochement, a turning point had already occurred which is 1968.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.045 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".