Walking for “Freedom”: The Charter and “Rights Talk” amidst Canada’s COVID-19 culture war: Marcher pour la « liberté » : La Charte et le « discours des droits » au milieu de la guerre culturelle COVID-19 du Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a culture war in Canada, as a determined segment of citizenry – the “anti-lockdown” movement – has furiously opposed public health measures. Chief among the many arguments advanced by anti-lockdowners is the assertion that public health measures constitute an unacceptable violation of Canadians’ Charter rights. The frequent invocation of Charter rights by the anti-lockdown movement cannot be understood in isolation, but rather as part of a wider pattern within Canadian political discourses. Since the adoption of the Charter in 1982, Canadian political discourses have been influenced by “rights talk,” a hyper-individualistic and uncompromisingly absolutist conception of Charter rights. The anti-lockdown movement is a manifestation of the deep permeation of rights talk into Canadian political life; through a case study of anti-lockdown discourses, this paper demonstrates how the hyper-individualism and absolutism of rights talk are at the core of anti-lockdowners’ understanding of the Charter. Rights talk is fundamentally at odds with our collective policy needs during a pandemic, leading to an extremely difficult pandemic political environment in Canada. Moreover, the damage anti-lockdowners have done to our public health discourses foreshadows the damage that unchecked rights talk can do to Canadian democracy; there is an urgent need to repair our collective understandings and discourses about the Charter and the fundamental rights protected therein. Francais La pandemie de COVID-19 a declenche une guerre culturelle au Canada, car un segment determine de la population — le mouvement « anti-confinement » — s’est furieusement oppose aux mesures de sante publique. Parmi les nombreux arguments avances par les militants anti-confinement, le principal est l’affirmation selon laquelle les mesures de sante publique constituent une violation inacceptable des droits des Canadiens en vertu de la Charte. L’invocation frequente des droits garantis par la Charte de la part du mouvement anti-confinement ne peut etre comprise isolement, mais plutot comme faisant partie d’un modele plus large dans les discours politiques canadiens. Depuis l’adoption de la Charte en 1982, les discours politiques canadiens ont ete influences par le « discours des droits », une conception hyperindividualiste et absolutiste sans compromis des droits de la Charte. Le mouvement anti-confinement est une manifestation de l’impregnation profonde du discours sur les droits dans la vie politique canadienne; a travers une etude de cas des discours anti-confinement, cet article demontre comment l’hyperindividualisme et l’absolutisme du discours sur les droits sont au cœur de la comprehension de la Charte par les militants anti-confinement. Le discours sur les droits est fondamentalement en desaccord avec nos besoins politiques collectifs pendant une pandemie, ce qui conduit a un environnement politique extremement difficile en cas de pandemie au Canada. De plus, les dommages que les militants anti-confinement ont causes a nos discours sur la sante publique laissent presager les dommages qu’un discours sur les droits non controle peut causer a la democratie canadienne; il y a un besoin urgent de reparer nos comprehensions et nos discours collectifs sur la Charte et les droits fondamentaux qui y sont proteges.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; 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".