Citizenship and the Challenge of Aboriginal Self‐Government: Is Deep Diversity Desirable?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Explores the possibilities of reconciling the demands of aboriginal peoples in Canada for forms of self‐government that will reflect and protect their distinct cultural traditions with the idea of a shared Canadian citizenship based on equality and political unity. It outlines the long history of the use of Canadian citizenship as a tool of coercive assimilation of First Nations people in Canada and argues that this history justifies considerable wariness on their part toward any project of civic integration. It also considers the question of whether the cultural differences between aboriginal people and other Canadians would warrant some limitations on the application of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Canada's Bill of Rights) to aboriginal people. Finally, the chapter argues that a unitary model of citizenship is bound to fail to achieve the civic integration of aboriginal people. It contends that a version of differentiated citizenship that makes dialogue over justice and cultural difference central is the best hope for achieving civic integration, though it is an approach that carries its own risks.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it