Our City Indians: Negotiating the Meaning of First Nations Urbanization in Canada, 1945-1975
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary cultural criticism has celebrated the potential of the idea of the “traveling native” for disrupting cultural assumptions about the modern “nation.” The focus has been on movements across contemporary national borders and boundaries—fundamentally, on transnationalism. However, nations also make sense of themselves through internal spatial and social divisions. Challenging these divisions also disrupts definitions of “nation.” The urbanization of First Nations people in Canada provides a telling illustration of this point. First Nations people were systematically dispossessed of their lands, which were “emptied” for colonial resettlement. Colonial constructions of the Canadian “nation” involved the creation of narrowly circumscribed native territories or reserves, separate from metropolitan centers. Arguably, reserves were viewed as temporary enclaves, places where First Nations people would either be civilized through agriculture, Christianity, or education to take their place in emerging Canadian society, or where First Nations people could live in peace while their “races” died out. The invention of reserves as temporary and “primitive” spaces of First Nations culture and history, secured a “place” for First Nations people in the spatial order of the Canadian nation. By the early decades of the 1900s, almost all First Nations people were settled on reserves, and almost all reserves were located at a distance from urban centers. Through a variety of mechanisms, many of which remain to be fully documented, these largely segregated patterns of settlement persisted unaltered into the 1950s (Table 1). Increasing population pressure and a chronic lack of economic possibilities on the small and often resource-poor reserves resulted in a gradually rising number of First Nations people migrating from reserves to cities after mid-century. Despite their initially very small numbers, non-aboriginal people perceived First Nations peoples’ presence in urban centers as extremely problematic. The conference referred to in the title of this paper, one of a number of events during this period involving a variety of non-
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.048 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".