“<i>Le temporaire durera plus longtemps</i>”: The Long Career of Providential <i>Indépendantisme</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dividing Québécois into the categories of federalists or indépendandistes obscures the existence of an important third group called “providential” indépendantistes (or “providentialists,” for short) in this article. The article describes the origin of this group in the 1840s and its continued presence in Quebec political culture ever since. Its often unspoken assumptions can be summed up in two contrasting assertions: Independence sometime. But not now. Confederation changed little, as far as providential indépendantisme is concerned. “Providentialists” could still be found on both sides of the political divide. From 1905 to 1995, the career of providential indépendantisme followed a rising curve until the 1950s, a swift (but only partial) eclipse in the 1960s, followed by a gradual re-emergence in the 1980s, which found its full expression only after the referendum of 1995, eventually in the form of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ). François Legault is an archetypal “providentialist.” The article explores some reasons why providential indépendantistes who may not wish to turn the dream of independence into reality are nevertheless unwilling to abandon the dream and concludes it is in the interest of Canada and of Canadian federalism not that providentialism should disappear but, rather, that it should remain providential.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".