Book Review: Forced Migration in/to Canada Clark-KazakChristina R.Forced Migration in/to Canada.Kingston and Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2024. 575 pp. $39.95 (paperback)ISBN: 978-0-2280-2217-6
Bibliographic record
Abstract
internationalist "Third Worldism."He neglects to note that this proposed restructuring of the economic order, which required authoritarian state direction of economies, was sponsored largely by regimes characterized by "forms of state capitalism in which ruling parties entrenched themselves … by tightening control over their country's natural resources and other sources of wealth" (280)-which he concedes had become widespread among former colonies.For Thomas, one of the paradoxes of globalization is that, while it encouraged decolonization in some ways, its culmination in neoliberalism merely entrenched what he sees as indefensible economic inequalities.He does not acknowledge that those former colonies that have recently gained most in prosperity and freedom for their citizenry are those that have embraced integration into the global economy and accepted the standards of "good governance"-which he denigrates-rather than the crackpot economics of the NIEO.Though it contains occasional insights, this book is fatally flawed in that it defines decolonization so expansively that its completion would require not merely formal independence, but the redressing of virtually all the world's ills-from terms of trade that favour some countries over others, to residual racism in everyday life.This is tantamount to wishing that history could begin anew, something a serious historian can hardly regard as possible.Thomas closes with the limp conclusion that "we still have some way to go" (350).The reader, reaching the end of this frustrating volume, may conclude that when it comes to understanding decolonization, some have further to go than others.Christina R. Clark-Kazak Forced Migration in/to Canada.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.017 |
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".