MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229931405 · doi:10.25071/1920-7336.30602

Legacies and Origins of the 1980s US-Central American Sanctuary Movement

2010· article· en· W4229931405 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Héctor Perla, Susan Bibler Coutin

Bibliographic record

VenueRefuge Canada s Journal on Refuge · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Social Dynamics in Chile and Latin America
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyImmigrationMovement (music)PoliticsPolitical scienceRefugeeGovernment (linguistics)Social movementGender studiesPolitical economySociologyLawAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article re-examines the US–Central American sanctu­ary movement of the 1980s.Our re-examination is motiv­ated by two factors.First, with the passage of time it is pos­sible to discern the movement’s origins in ways that could not be fully articulated while it was ongoing.We are able to show how certain relationships between the movement’s North and Central American activists were celebrated, while others were obscured due to fear for Salvadoran immigrant activists’ safety and concern about inadver­tently undermining the movement’s legitimacy.Specifically, we draw attention to the movement’s transnational nature, noting that what made it so powerful was its origin as part of a broader effort by Salvadoran revolutionaries to mobil­ize North American society to oppose US support for the Salvadoran government.Ironically, to achieve this objective Salvadoran immigrant activists had to stay quiet, become invisible, and abstain from taking certain leadership roles, while embracing identities that may have implied weak­ness or passivity, such as “refugee” or “victim.” Second, the US–Central American sanctuary movement provides powerful insight into future understandings of sanctuary as a concept and practice.The movement’s legacies extend beyond participants’ stated goals, while the movement’s transnational political and organizational focus differenti­ates it from current sanctuary practices.Thus, re-examin­ing its origins and legacies suggests that apparent similar­ities in the form of sanctuary incidents may hide underlying differences and that current sanctuary practices may also eventually have unanticipated consequences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRefuge Canada s Journal on RefugeSame topicPolitical and Social Dynamics in Chile and Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207