From white vs. native to white and native : going Indian, playing Indian and identifying with first nations values
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper explores an interesting aspect of trans-Atlantic and cross-cultural studies: the Native vs. white disparity in some stories of indigenization and its alleged replacement with the Native and white paradigm symbolically signifi ed by ethno-cultural hybrids. However, unlike captives and other involuntary shift ers, who create a genuine hybrid identity with authentic ethno-cultural markers, the Indian "wannabes" sustain the opposition between the two cultures, the barriers, and consequently the racial divides they intend to diminish. The overall implication is that since only the selected features of Native culture are seen as worth copying and assuming as part of one's identity, evidently "white" is still better; it just needs embellishment with a few "added Indian traits." Thus many artists continue to demonstrate the Native vs. white paradigm. More critical attention should be devoted to notions and nature of whiteness in order to further a subtle understanding of the cultural strongholds of colonialism and to acquire cultural sensitivity possessed by more authentic shifters.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".