{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020752269779507133, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0006485084306095979, 'mean_word_length': 5.145418326693227, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Blockades or Breakthroughs? Aboriginal Peoples Confront the Canadian State by Yale D. Belanger and P. Whitney Lackenbauer (review)

in three sections: ‘The Politics of Diversity’, ‘Political Mobilization’, and ‘Political Institutions and Public Policy’. As it is impossible for me to review all the excellent chapters, I have selected two – one each from the first and second sections. Luc Turgeon et al. make a persuasive case for the study of comparative politics in Canada. One of their key arguments, which counters a criticism often made of the field, is that it does not diminish the study of Canadian politics. On the contrary, they argue that comparing Canada with other countries helps to understand the peculiarities of the Canadian experience. Martin Papillon maintains, in his chapter ‘Framing Self-Determination: The Politics of Indigenous Rights in Canada and the United States’, that Canada and the US make a useful comparison in terms of Indigenous politics as they have similar systems. However, he acknowledges that there are small but important differences – the most prominent being the different constitutional relationships between Indigenous peoples in the US and in Canada. One of the common features of both countries in terms of Indigenous politics is self-determination. Papillon charts some of the major milestones in this area in both countries in the past 50 years or so. An important theme in his chapter is that this was a process which was very much influenced by different governments, court decisions, international circumstances and, in some ways most importantly, changes in the views of Indigenous groups themselves on the best methods to be adopted to achieve their goals. ‘Canadian Immigrant Electoral Support in Comparative Perspective’ by Stephen White and Antoine Bilodeau compares immigrant electoral support in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. One of the fundamental arguments they make is that, generally speaking, immigrants from non-traditional sources in the three countries are disproportionately strong supporters of the Liberal Party of Canada, the Australian Labor Party, and the New Zealand Labour Party – the main left of centre parties. One of the explanations offered for this is the general perception held by these immigrants that these political parties are overall more supportive of immigration and greater ethnic diversity in their respective polities. But White and Bilodeau make the point that the gap between native-born or immigrants from more traditional sources and non-traditional sources is wider in Canada than in Australia and New Zealand. This is an excellent example of the benefits of comparative studies, for without comparing the former to the latter two this would not have come to light. This is a noteworthy edited collection which illustrates the benefits of comparative studies in political science in Canada. It will appeal more to specialist readers than general readers as some of the chapters are quite theoretical, but it is nevertheless highly recommended. Jatinder Mann, University of Alberta