MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2266176879 · doi:10.1080/08935696.2015.1123018

Red Skin, White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition, by Glen Sean Coulthard

2016· article· en· W2266176879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Ives

Bibliographic record

VenueRethinking Marxism · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismPoliticsIndigenousGenocideWhite (mutation)SociologyArgument (complex analysis)Gender studiesHistoryLawPolitical scienceBiologyArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review describes Coulthard's use of the work of Frantz Fanon and Karl Marx to provide an assessment of ongoing settler colonialism in Canada and elsewhere. Critiquing the “politics of recognition” represented by Charles Taylor and illustrating the shift from projects of assimilation and overt cultural genocide to those of reconciliation and apology, Coulthard warns that such projects continue rather than alter psyscho-affective attachments to colonialism and its dispossession of land and resources. Coulthard looks to the work of Indigenous thinkers and traditions as well as to struggles such as Idle No More to offer succinct, perceptive political analysis. Coulthard's use of Marx's notion of “primitive accumulation” is insightful, complementing his argument that colonialism in the form of a “politics of recognition” indicates a shift in the role of violence. Coulthard's critique of Fanon's approach to culture and the sharp distinction between land and labor opens questions that require further investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRethinking MarxismSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207