Colonizing the demos? Settler rights, Indigenous sovereignty, and the contested ‘structure of governance’ in Canada’s North
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
Settler-colonialism can consist of a struggle over the pre-political ‘structure of governance’ – over who composes the demos and how decisions should be made. This article examines two lawsuits where settlers contested the Indigenous structure of governance in Canada’s Northwest Territories. I show that in both cases settlers brandished a novel ‘tool of elimination,’ individual rights to voting, mobility and expression. I trace how settlers used this tool in a strategic two-pronged way, challenging as ‘illiberal’ restrictive laws flowing from Indigenous sovereignty and then championing race-neutral laws the promulgation of which would open the demos to settler domination. I show that courts adjudicating these challenges were compelled to grapple with the appropriate ‘framing of justice’ – with whether the relevant rights-bearer was the universal individual or the ‘constitutionally prior’ Indigenous demos. I conclude that, where the court decided on individual-rights grounds, settlers were able to extend control over the structure of governance.
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 | 0.004 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it