A Genocide that Precedes Genocide: Reconciling “genocide” and “indigeneity” with a paradox of otherness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genocide and settler colonialism are conceptually related ideas, although the specific relationship remains unclear. Whereas some scholars develop subcategories of “colonial genocide” or examine the historical origins of these concepts, I address the signification of “genocide” and “indigeneity.” I explore the system of meanings underlying each concept to suggest that both are paradoxically rooted in otherness. The category of indigeneity reveals a basic paradox: the colonizer and Indigenous other are separate from but, simultaneously, dependent upon one another. Likewise, with genocide the perpetrator and othered victim are separate but at the same time dependent on each other. Genocide and indigeneity are conceptually related so that one can consider them as two aspects of the same phenomenon. I propose conceptualizing the relationship between indigeneity and genocide as a two-stage process of erasure in settler societies, with imposition of the category of indigeneity as a preliminary genocide that precedes a formal act of genocide.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".