The Genocide Question and Indian Residential Schools in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has been investigating the array of crimes committed in Canada's Indian Residential Schools. Genocide is being invoked with increasing regularity to describe the crimes inflicted within the IRS system, the intent behind those crimes, and the legacies that have flowed from them. We ask the following questions. Did Canada commit genocide against Aboriginal peoples by attempting to forcibly assimilate them in residential schools? How does the UN Genocide Convention help interpret genocide claims? If not genocide, what other descriptors are more appropriate? Our position might be described as “fence sitting”: whether genocide was committed cannot be definitively settled at this time . This has to do with polyvalent interpretations of the term, coupled with the growing body of evidence the TRC is building up. We favour using the term cultural genocide as a “ground floor” and a means to legally and morally interpret the IRS system. Résumé. La Commission de vérité et réconciliation a enquêté sur la matrice de crimes commis dans les pensionnats indiens au Canada. Le mot génocide est invoqué avec une régularité croissante pour décrire les crimes infligés au sein du système des pensionnats, l'intention derrière ces crimes, et l'héritage qui s'en est ensuivie. Nous posons les questions suivantes: le Canada a-t-il commis le génocide contre les élèves Aborigènes en essayant de les assimiler de force dans des pensionnats indiens? Comment la Convention des Nations Unies sur la prévention de génocide peut-elle aider interprétations des revendications de génocide ? Si ce pas de génocide, quel autre descripteur est plus approprié ? Notre position pourrait être décrite comme « séance de clôture »: la question de génocide ne peut être réglée définitivement en ce moment . Cela concerne les interprétations polyvalentes du terme, couplé avec le corps grandissant d'évidence que le CVR accumule. Nous préférons le terme génocide culturel comme « un rez-de-chaussée » et comme un moyen de légalement et moralement interpréter le système IRS.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".