Defining Supremacy: Walter J. Bossy and the Conceptual Origins of the Canadian ‘Third Force’ (1931-1972)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation, entitled “Defining Supremacy: Walter J. Bossy and the Conceptual Origins of the Canadian ‘Third Force’ (1931-1972)”, examines a neglected aspect of the history of Canadian multiculturalism to illuminate the ideological foundations of the concept ‘third force’. Focusing on the particular thought of ultra-conservative Ukrainian Canadian Walter J. Bossy during his time in Montreal (1931-1970s), I demonstrate that the idea that Canada was composed of three equally important groups emerged from a context defined by reactionary ideas on ethnic diversity and integration. Two broad questions shape this research: first, what the meaning originally attached to the idea of a ‘third force’ was, and what the intentions behind the conceptualization of a trichotomic Canada were; second, whether Bossy’s understanding of the ‘third force’ precedes, or is related in any way to, postwar debates on liberal multiculturalism at the core of which was the existence of a ‘third force’. Based upon Jouni-Matti Kuukkanen’s theory of conceptual change (2008), this study concludes that Bossy’s conceptualization of the ‘third force’ shares the core idea of a trichotomic definition of Canada with postwar liberal multiculturalism, but radically differs from it in that Bossy’s ideas at the margin of the ‘third force’ (Christian and European supremacy, for example) never evolved. It was progressive sectors of the Canadian population who altered existing ideas at the margin of ‘third force’ and ultimately used the concept to propose a more plural and egalitarian society. This dissertation constitutes a contribution to the study of Canadian multiculturalism, radical-right ideology, and the history of concepts.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".