Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 21st century has seen growing attention to settler colonialism among academic researchers in Canada and internationally. In the Canadian context, interest has been fuelled above all by an ongoing resurgence of Indigenous activism and intellectual work, of which the most visible expression to most non-Indigenous people was the Idle No More movement of 2012–13. To date, however, little attention has been paid to settler colonialism within labour studies, broadly understood. As a modest contribution to remedying this deficiency, this article argues for the importance of understanding Canada as a settler-colonial society, proposes a conceptualization of settler colonialism from the perspective of a historical materialism reconstructed through engagement with Indigenous anticolonial thought, and offers some preliminary reflections on integrating analysis of settler colonialism into historical and contemporary research on labour. Au 21e siècle, le colonialisme des colons a attiré de plus en plus l’attention des chercheurs universitaires canadiens et internationaux. Dans le contexte canadien, l’intérêt a été alimenté principalement par une résurgence continue du travail intellectuel et du militantisme autochtones, dont l’expression la plus visible pour la plupart des peuples non autochtones était le mouvement Idle No More de 2012–2013. À ce jour, toutefois, peu d’attention a été accordée au colonialisme des colons dans le cadre d’études sur le travail, au sens large. Cet article, qui contribue modestement à remédier à cette lacune, souligne l’importance de comprendre le Canada comme société de colonisation, propose une conceptualisation du colonialisme sous l’angle du matérialisme historique reconstruit à travers la confrontation avec la pensée anticoloniale offre des réflexions préliminaires sur l’intégration de l’analyse du colonialisme des colons dans la recherche historique et contemporaine sur le travail.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".