Constructing the nation through immigration law and legal processes of belonging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this critical literature review is to define the connection between immigration policies and the construction of a national identity, and to discuss what the implications of such connections may be. Tracing how the legal subjectivity of the migrant has developed throughout time and through policy reveals how messages about the nation and Others are created, sustained, and circulated through legal policies. What values are implicit within Canadian immigration policy? How does the migrant ‘other’ help ‘us’ stay ‘us’? How do nationalist ideologies construct the Other and how is this reflected in labour market segmentation? Constructing a national identity involves categorizing migrants into legal categories of belonging, a process in which historical positions of power are both legitimized and re-established through law. Discourses about temporary foreign workers provide examples of how the Other is framed in limited terms and in opposition to that of legitimate members of Canadian society. Key Terms: Citizenship, discourse, subjectivity, immigration law, identity, power, humanitarianism, temporary foreign workers, labour market segmentation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".