Separatist Movements in Constitutional Democracies: Canada and Quebec Nationalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem for such movements is that it is not easy winning the votes of nationalists in competitive elections from other political parties that may boast of a prestigious past, mobilize an enormous bureaucracy, or dispose of political patronage. Frustrated by the “traps” that democracy can spring, some nationalist movements break with the electoral process and turn to the use of force to achieve their objectives. While it has not come to that in Scotland or Catalonia, Basque separatists in Spain encompass separate political and military organizations. The military wing of the ETA (Euzkadi Ta Askatasuna, or Basque Fatherland and Liberty), the most militant separatist group, has carried out political assassinations and bombings. By contrast, the political wing of the ETA (Herri Batasuna) has become more engaged in the Spanish electoral system and stressed political means of separation. An even more moderate group, the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV), which exercises power in the Basque lands, is committed to nonviolence. Spanish democracy has tried to blunt Basque separatist ambitions, channel them into parliamentary means, and divide the nationalist movement. Democracy can provide a real political opportunity structure for separatists to create a broad political movement. But it can also effectively accommodate and weaken ethno-separatist groups.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".