Reforming Multiculturalism in a Bi-National Society: Aboriginal Peoples and the Search for Truth and Reconciliation in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 1960s, some Aboriginal theorists and political leaders have opposed principles of multiculturalism in Canada. They do so largely on the premise that they dilute Aboriginal legal rights and cultural distinctiveness. Multiculturalism and its promise of generic tolerance (within western institutions) and formal equality go against what many Aboriginal peoples desire from the federal state. Multiculturalism also fails to grapple with the continuing inequalities between Aboriginal and settler populations. This article argues that we need to work towards embracing a “syncretic multiculturalism,” which will involve adopting a “bi-national” perspective, focusing on the need for partnership between Aboriginal and Shognosh people, thus moving away from our current “mono-national” and “colonial multicultural” policies. Without acknowledgment of the harms that continue to be done by our state, and without a genuine effort to repair those harms, both multiculturalism and bilingualism buttress colonialism, and impede any form of genuine reconciliation with Aboriginal peoples.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".