Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s, the question of Quebec’s status within Confederation has held centre stage in the Canadian unity debate. Comparatively little has been written about British Columbia, a province that for so long has seen itself on the periphery of the Canadian federation. The Politics of Resentment is the first book to examine the role that British Columbia has played in the evolving Canadian unity debate. Resnick explores what makes B.C. stand apart as a region of Canada. He looks at the views of politicians, opinion-makers, and ordinary British Columbians on the challenges posed by Quebec nationalism, on their sense of estrangement from central Canada, and on what they see as the future of Canadian unity. He concludes with an examination of the likely B.C. response in the event of a “yes” vote in any future Quebec referendum on sovereignty. Clearly written and provocative, The Politics of Resentment provides a new way of thinking about British Columbia’s place within the Canadian federation. It draws on a wide range of sources – from government documents and from the media, to the work of B.C. authors and commentators, to the academic literature on regionalism and nationalism – to capture what underlies the often fractured relationship between Canada’s westernmost province and the rest of the country.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".