The Limits of Citizenship: Economic Barriers to Suffrage in Nineteenth and Twentieth-Century Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter explores long-lasting economic and class-based restrictions on suffrage rights in Canada over the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, with a focus on property and taxpayer voting qualifications, and secondly, exclusions of those receiving state or charitable assistance, including the aged, sick, and poor. These prohibitions denoting class and wealth were intertwined with changing gender-based, racial, and colonial voting restrictions and structures of inequality, always in complicated ways. By focusing on legislated economic exclusions at all three levels of government, we can see how struggles over suffrage remained embedded in social and economic relations of power long after it was claimed “universal” suffrage prevailed. The paper also notes the longest barrier to voting, namely incarceration, which might be interpreted as a race and class-based exclusion. Understanding the rationales for, and longevity of exclusions based on class/property and poverty, as well as gender and race, offers a correction to whig narratives of inevitable suffrage progress, highlighting the resilient power relations, both material and ideological, which characterised a profoundly unequal society.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".