Belated Justice? The Indian Claims Commission and the Waitangi Tribunal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his recent book, Elazar Barkan proposes that since August 1952, when Germany agreed to compensate Jews for the crimes of the Holocaust, there has been a gathering momentum for nations to admit that they committed historical injustices and to offer restitution to the victims. The claims of indigenous peoples for return of land, for compensation for dispossession, and for repatriation of skeletal remains and other sacred items are an essential part of this transition to what Barkan sees as a new age of “moral politics.” By admitting to injustice and offering some form of compensation, Barkan argues, the state assuages its guilt and the indigenous population gains a reinforced identity, an enhanced legitimacy, and perhaps improved economic status. In Barkan’s conception, this is a global process worked out differently in each national setting, because each nation has a particular colonial narrative and a distinctive political culture.\nThis is the point of departure for this article, a comparison of the US Indian Claims Commission, which heard Native American claims from 1946 to 1978, and New Zealand’s Waitangi Tribunal, which has received Maori claims since 1975. The objective is to ascertain which forum-and society-has achieved the most in redressing the injustices of colonial rule and which, therefore, offers the better precedent for other societies negotiating the contorted terrain of land and other categories of claims.\nThere exists a considerable body of scholarship comparing indigenous peoples’ dispossession and claims in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Yet the United States and Native Americans are often set apart in such comparisons. The assumption seems to be that, because the United States (through the Marshall Trilogy) early and unambiguously recognized Native title in law as a right of occupancy that could only be extinguished through treaty, its relationship to its indigenous people is exceptional.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".