New Directions in Saskatchewan Public Policy/Remaining Loyal: Social Democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
McGrane, David P. (Ed.). New Directions in Saskatchewan Public Policy. Regina, Canada: CPRC Press, University of Regina, 2011David McGrane Remaining Loyal: Democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan Montreal & Kingston, London, Ithaca: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2014David McGrane is an associate professor of political studies at St. Thomas More College, University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, Canada. Over course of three years, he published two books on Saskatchewan and Quebec (Canadian provinces) social democratic politics in (McGrane, 2011, 2014), a considerable accomplishment. This research on Saskatchewan and Quebec social democratic governments is important to students of public sector innovation because these provinces have often been most innovative in Canada (see also, for example, Glor, 1997, 2002 in which I identify 159 innovations of Saskatchewan government of 1971-82). This suggest ideology may be important to innovation.McGrane 's Remaining Loyal: Democracy in Quebec and Saskatchewan examines ideology of social democratic parties and governments in Quebec and Saskatchewan. He argues (1) that Saskatchewan Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) and its successor, New Democratic Party were and remain social democratic parties, and that Rassemblement pour l'independence nationale (RIN) from 1963 and Parti Quebecois (PQ) from 1968 in Quebec were and are social democratic parties (page 64), (2) that third way successors to traditional social democratic parties in Quebec and Saskatchewan are social democratic parties; and (3) that while Quebec's political culture may not be consistently social democratic, Saskatchewan's political culture has been, although this may be in process of changing (page 246). In making these assertions, McGrane takes on several of major controversies in Canadian and social democratic politics in Canada and internationally.McGrane's claims hinge on his definition of social democracy. He distinguishes between Fabian theory and that of Eduard Bernstein, a German who spent time with Fabians in United Kingdom. His first distinction is between Fabians' and Bernstein's definitions of social democracy. The key to this difference is his understanding of Fabians' sense of evolution in history as being inevitable, gradual and irreversible and Bernstein's as not being inevitable, nor as having a fixed, final goal. McGrane adopts latter perspective-social democracy is the implementation of a certain set of principles by a group of determined reformers whose specific goals vary by time and place (McGrane, 2014: 19)-and concludes Social democracy should not be seen as a fixed set of policies then, but rather a set of values (p. 206).1McGrane makes a second distinction between Fabians and Bernstein, namely, their approach to democracy and rights. The Fabians favour democracy because it is a mechanism to achieve socialist reforms, but Bernstein understands democracy as both means and end: it is means to achieve socialism and it is form in which socialism will be achieved. Bernstein's idea of democracy includes justice, defined as equality of rights including minority rights, and limits on rule of majority. He sees social democracy as heir to liberalism but as adopting a higher ideal, because it guarantees civil, social and economic democracy.Unlike in Europe, in Canada affiliation with labour movement was not very important (pages 29-30), nor was class politics in emergence of social democracy in Saskatchewan and Quebec. In fact, small farmers were a much more important political constituency in Saskatchewan. Even more important was development of social movements that provided an acceptable context and legitimacy for government intervention in economy after World War II. The economy, political institutions, and political agents were also important (page 165). …
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it