Bibliographic record
Abstract
When social democratic politicians in the 1990s moderated their ideas and policies as part of a turn towards the "third way," they were assailed as traitors to the cause. Remaining Loyal demonstrates that while third way social democrats in Quebec and Saskatchewan supplemented certain social democratic ideas with more right-wing economic programs, their public policies remained true to the original spirit of social democracy. Drawing on a range of archival resources, David McGrane traces the evolution of social democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan from their respective origins in social Catholic thought and agrarian protest movements at the turn of the twentieth century to the most recent Parti Québécois and New Democratic Party governments. In doing so, he reconstructs the public policies of traditional social democracy from the postwar era and the third way in the 1990s and early 2000s and finds both differences and continuities. McGrane contends that remaining loyal to core social democratic values is exactly what differentiates the third way from neo-liberalism in Saskatchewan and Quebec. The first historical comparison of social democracy in Saskatchewan and Quebec, Remaining Loyal challenges how we think about the recent ideological evolution of left-wing parties in Canada and the rest of the world.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.014 |
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".