Multiculturalism, Colonialism, and Racialization: Conceptual Starting Points
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes The language for and idea of Canada can be challenged from an anti-colonial perspective. Canada, and its geographic, physical, and governmental claims to land and power, exist because of imposed hegemonic control. Using cultural background to account for, or contextualize, the actions of individuals, as Benhabib (2002 Benhabib , S. ( 2002 ). The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era . Princeton : Princeton University Press .[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 89) contended, "imprisons the individual in a cage of univocal cultural interpretations and psychological motivations; individuals' intentions are reduced to cultural stereotypes; moral agency is reduced to cultural puppetry." For a critique of the article by Lawrence and Dua (2005 Lawrence , B. and Dua , E. ( 2005 ). Decolonizing Antiracism . Social Justice , 32 ( 4 ), 120 – 143 . [Google Scholar]), see Sharma and Wright (2008–2009) who raise two central areas of critique. First, Sharma and Wright questioned whether it is "historically accurate or analytically precise" to identify those enslaved or displaced as settlers. They also challenge the idea that "decolonization may be secured through the nationalist project" (Sharma and Wright 2008–2009, 121). Simpson et al. (this issue) believe that however we name non-whites or visible minorities in Canada, these groups do have a relationship to Indigenous people and lands that has its origins in colonialism. That is, white settlers and non-whites in Canada live on occupied territory, and daily situate our practices and choices in relationship to colonialism. For a useful discussion of land and treaty rights in the context of the Sparrow case, see Asch (2010 Asch , M. ( 2010 ). Canadian Sovereignty and Universal History In H. Lessard , R. Johnson & J. Webber (Eds.), Storied Communities: Narratives of Contact and Arrival in Constituting Political Community (pp. 29 – 39 ). Vancouver , Canada : UBC Press . [Google Scholar]).
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 | 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".