Aboriginal Genocide in Canada and Achieving Transitional Justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The indigenous peoples of Canada have been severely mistreated since the period of European colonization and the founding of the country up to the end of the last century, resulting in serious human rights disparity. Aboriginal leaders, some politicians and members of the public are calling past actions, genocide. Principally a philosophical thesis, this paper deals with the question of the Government of Canada recognizing that their historical treatment of the indigenous peoples of Canada was genocide and whether, in light of the facts that have come to view in the past twenty years, it is the just response from the government; which I contend would result in aiding the nation to heal and move forward. The component parts for understanding this issue – the Aboriginals, history of the Indian Residential School System, genocide and culture, and transitional justice - are viewed through a conceptual analysis of these contexts, with post-colonial discourse narrative. In this way, one can judge based on merit the validity of the argument. I conclude with a philosophical analysis in normative ethics, that transitional justice and equitable rights fulfillment cannot move forward for all Canadians, if the label of genocide is not acknowledged as applicable to the era of the Indian Residential Schools.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".