From sovereignty to freedom: Towards an indigenous political discourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A partir de l'exemple de l'Amerique du Nord (Etats-Unis, Canada), l'A. montre comment le debat sur la souverainete des peuples autochtones s'inscrit dans l'histoire du colonialisme et de l'endocolonialisme europeen et occidental. Il soutient que l'interaction (inter-relation ou opposition) entre les doctrines etatiques de la souverainete (fondees sur la domination) et les conceptions autochtones des relations politiques (fondees sur la liberte, le respect et l'autonomie) caracterise de facon generale le discours sur la souverainete autochtone. Il propose une critique approfondie de la conception occidentale de la souverainete et une analyse des implications de son acceptation par les peuples autochtones d'Amerique du Nord. Selon l'A., l'imposition du concept de souverainete a servi a saper les fondements traditionnels de la puissance autochtone. Il suggere que la liberation des peuples autochtones d'Amerique du Nord des structures de pouvoir imposees, implique, d'une part, le rejet de l'ensemble du discours sur la souverainete, et, d'autre part, la promotion d'un renouveau traditionaliste et la reconfiguration des structures coloniales.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 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".