“Which Kind of Imperialism?” Early Cold War Decolonization and Canada–US Relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Prior to World War II, Canada's government and its citizens were generally supportive of British imperialism, and of Britain's foreign policy in general. Though specific groups within Canada—most notably Francophones, leftist and labour leaders, and growing numbers of ethnic minorities—had expressed long-standing opposition to colonialism, the nation's elites viewed themselves as partners in Britain's global civilizing project. These affinities began to break down during the 1940s, as the lessons of World War II, along with the simultaneous rise of American power and ebbing of British authority, forced Canada's leaders to reassess their attitudes and policies regarding imperialism. Yet, at the precise moment many Canadians were striving to adopt a more “American” approach to the issue, one which drew on nearly two centuries of republican-based critiques of foreign domination, the United States was reigning in its own antipathy to imperialism in light of emerging Cold War realities. This study finds that these repositionings proved disorienting for a still-powerful constituency of Anglophiles, who feared their nation was being seduced into a new and less noble imperial project.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".