Producing legitimacy: reconciliation and the negotiation of aboriginal rights in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article explores two distinct meanings of reconciliation associated with the Nisga'a treaty in Canada. In the first, people are using reconciliation to mean correcting the mistakes of the past and creating a new relationship between aboriginal and non‐aboriginal Canadians. In the second, people use reconciliation to mean reconciling the constitutionally protected aboriginal rights of the Nisga'a with Canadian sovereignty and the presence of non‐aboriginal Canadian society. In this article I show that reconciliation in the first sense is a language of political legitimation that links the treaty with progress and the fulfilment of modern, enlightenment values. The second sense of reconciliation is more specific and involves making formerly incompatible rights compatible. I argue that by reconciling aboriginal rights with Canadian sovereignty the treaty does not repudiate the colonial insistence that aboriginal people conform to non‐aboriginal laws and institutions to the extent implied in the more celebratory uses of reconciliation. Résumé Le présent article explore deux significations distinctes de la réconciliation telles qu'elles sont associées à l'accord Nisga'a au Canada. Dans la première, la réconciliation prend le sens d'une correction des erreurs du passé et d'une création de nouvelles relations entre les Canadiens aborigènes et non aborigènes. Dans la deuxième, la réconciliation a le sens d'une conciliation entre les droits des aborigènes, en l'occurrence les Nisga'a, tels que les consacre la Constitution, d'une part, et la souveraineté canadienne et la présence d'une société canadienne non aborigène d'autre part. L'auteur montre ici que la réconciliation dans le premier sens est un langage de légitimation politique qui lie le traité au progrès et à la réalisation de valeurs modernes et éclairées. Le deuxième sens de la réconciliation est plus spécifique et implique que l'on rende compatibles des droits qui ne l'étaient pas jusqu'alors. Selon l'auteur, en conciliant les droits des aborigènes avec la souveraineté canadienne, le traité ne renonce pas à la volonté coloniale de plier les peuples aborigènes à des lois et institutions non aborigènes, tel que cela est impliqué dans les usages plus solennels de la réconciliation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".