Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since becoming Premier of Ontario in 2018, Doug Ford has utilized the Westminster Parliamentary system and invocations of particular types of majoritarian politics to attempt to shield his government from accountability and critique. This article explores the use of majoritarian discourse and the specific legislative tools that the Ford government has used to further the neoliberalization of the Ontario state apparatus. This is represented by, but not limited to, The Better Local Democracy Act (2018) and the use of creatures of the province to impose a total restructuring of the City of Toronto’s democratic-decision making institutions and processes; the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act (2022), which set an unparalleled centralization of power in municipal mayor’s offices in Toronto and Ottawa; and his unprecedented usage of the Notwithstanding Clause on two occasions, but particularly the Keeping Students in Class Act (2022) which overrode constitutionally protected collective bargaining and strike rights for CUPE education workers in Ontario. Utilizing a combination of what Ian Bruff (2014) describes as ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ and Thomas McDowell (2019; 2021) refers to as “neoliberal parliamentarism,” this article argues that while seemingly very different cases that these pieces of legislation and the discourses to justify them are indicative of a turn towards an oscillating majoritarian and inverted majoritarian form of neoliberalization rooted in the idea of a specific form of executive parliamentary supremacy at multiple territorial levels of Canadian federalism and governance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".