Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper conceptualizes colonialism from an indigenous perspective and analyses the effects of colonization on First Nations, with particular focus on explaining the fundamental roots of the psychophysical crises and dependency of First Nations upon the state. Central to its analysis is the effect of colonially-generated cultural disruptions that compound the effects of dispossession to create near total psychological, physical and financial dependency on the state. The paper argues that it is the cumulative and ongoing effects of this crisis of dependency that form the context of First Nations existences today. Social suffering, unresolved psychophysical harms of historical trauma and cultural dislocation are identified as the main sources of a crisis in which First Nations ’ opportunities for self-sufficient, healthy and autonomous lives on individual and collective levels are extremely limited because Indigenous people have developed complexes of behaviour and mental attitudes that reflect their colonial situation. Through a review and consideration of the scholarly literature, it identifies a direct relationship between government laws and policies applied to Indigenous peoples and the myriad mental and physical health problems and economic deprivations. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for developing policy responses to the situation which are oriented towards supporting and facilitating Indigenous people’s reconnection to their homelands, restoration of land-based cultural practices and the rebuilding of indigenous communities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".