Book Review: Indigenous Difference and the Constitution of Canada, by Patrick Macklem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patrick Macklem's book explores the constitutional relationship between Aboriginal people and the Canadian state, arguing that the special features of this relationship mandate constitutional protection of indigenous difference in the name of equality.It is a book full of the rigour typical of the best academic scholarship and exhibits throughout the concern and aspiration for justice on which law depends for its normative power and integrity.With an approach that is pragmatic, contextual, and principled, Macklem confronts all the difficult questions head-on.The central organizing principle of Macklem's argument is the principle of equality within a constitutional framework of distributive justice.Constitutionalism is redefined in his work as a distributive enterprise."As a distributive enterprise, constitutional law implicates an aspiration that power be distributed in a just manner." 3 Justice is defined by reference to the value of equality.As a result, everything in Macklem's vision of justice turns on the meaning of equality.Drawing on authority that I [hereinafter hidigenous Difference].The reviewer would like to express many thanks to Ian B.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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".