Analysing recognition multidirectionally: Canada, United Nations membership, and the Algerian question
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The process of admitting new members to the United Nations has historically been contentious and contradictory. This paper examines new membership through the lens of recognition, focusing on the historical case of Canada’s role in this debate between 1955 and 1962. Canada led the initiative to grant membership to 16 members in 1955 and supported new membership for 17 others (including former French colonies) in 1960. Simultaneously, it opposed resolutions in the UN General Assembly supporting Algerian independence from France . The concept of recognition helps explain this inconsistency, while this case also reveals much about recognition itself. I argue that recognition, both thick and thin, can be multidirectional, in that granting recognition to another state is part of that state’s own struggle for recognition. In 1955 and 1960, Canada granted thin recognition to new members, which had implications for its own struggle for thick recognition. With Algerian independence, this was a debate about thick recognition for Algeria and for France; Canada’s complex struggle for thick recognition also drove its resistance to recognizing Algeria.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".