THE IMAGE OF THE USA AS A FACTOR IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CANADIAN NATIONALISM DURING THE UPRISINGS OF THE 1830s.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
В настоящее время исследователи находят все больше примеров, не вписывающихся в модернистскую парадигму исследований национализма. Один из таких примеров — канадский национализм. Само его возникновение представляет собой вызов для ученых. Если национализм — это принцип, согласно которому политические и культурные границы должны совпадать, как утверждал Э. Геллнер, то возникает вопрос, почему канадцы считают себя отдельной нацией и не присоединились до сих пор к американской нации или, если подходить с точки зрения исторической перспективы, почему они отделились от британцев, ведь их культурные отличия и от тех, и от других минимальны даже сегодня, не говоря о более ранних исторических периодах. В попытке найти иной, более плодотворный подход к изучению канадского национализма данная статья выстроена на ставшем уже классическим постулате Ф. Барта о конструирующей функции границ в формировании национальной идентичности. С такой исследовательской перспективы национализм — это исторически уникальный результат рефлексии о Другом, или, выражаясь словами Ж. Лакана, конституирующем Другом. Таким образом, целью данной статьи является изучение роли США как значимого Другого в истории канадского национализма. В частности, в ней доказывается, что именно вовлечение американских граждан в события канадских восстаний 1830-х гг., или, как их еще иногда называют, революций, предопределило неудачный исход этих событий по причине возникшего конфликта между зарождавшимся канадским национализмом и образом Другого, символически увязанным с американским вмешательством. Researchers discover more and more cases that do not fit into the modernist paradigm of the nationalism studies. One is Canadian nationalism. It very occurrence presents a challenge to the paradigm of nationalism studies. If nationalism is the principle that demands political and cultural boundaries to coincide, as Gellner argued, it is not clear why Canadians consider themselves a nation and have not yet turned into Americans, or at least, why they do not continue to consider themselves British, since their cultural differences from both those are minimal even today, not to mention the XXth or the XIXth century. In search of a different approach to the study of Canadian nationalism, this paper based on Barth’s classic postulate about the constitutive function of borders in the formation of national identity. From such a research perspective, nationalism is considered as a historically unique result of reflection on the “other” or, in the words of J. Lacan, the “constitutive other”. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to explore the role of the United States as a “significant other” in the history of Canadian nationalism. In particular, I’m going to show that it was the involvement of American citizens in the events of the Canadian uprisings of the 1830s. or, as they are sometimes called, revolutions, that predetermined the unfortunate outcome of these events precisely because of the conflict that arose between the emerging Canadian nationalism and the image of the “other”, symbolically linked to American intervention.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".