Having CLOUT: becoming an ally and having the power to resist colonialism and neoliberalism in Winnipeg's inner city
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Becoming an ally to Indigenous peoples, as a planner, depends on understanding the oppressive dynamics of colonialism and neoliberalism that invisibilize their everyday realities. Resisting these dynamics as an ally, and as a planner, also depends on becoming liberated from them, and to create spaces for collectivization, since only the collective has the power to resist the oppressive systems and discourses that characterize these ideologies. In Winnipeg, a coalition of Indigenous inner city community development practitioners (CLOUT) is effectively resisting these hegemonies. Contrasting this everyday resistance praxis is the practice of non-Indigenous city planners who are placated in their own everyday by the problems of difference and separation these hegemonies produce; effectively being thwarted in their ability to resist. Alliance building will remain a challenge between these two groups, that is unless the planners learn from CLOUT: become allies to each other, unlearn their euro-western way of thinking and learn the value of practices oriented towards integration, that in themselves counter the divisive nature colonialism and neoliberalism.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.046 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".