MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949908248 · doi:10.29173/alr2522

“We the North” As the Dispossession of Indigenous Identity and a Slogan of Canada’s Enduring Colonial Legacy

2019· article· en· W2949908248 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Daniel Dylan

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSloganIndigenousNationalismColonialismNational identityIdentity (music)AppropriationPolitical scienceGender studiesSociologyHistoryEthnologyPoliticsLawAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the only Canadian team in the professional United States’ National Basketball Association, the Toronto Raptors adopted the slogan “We the North.” The new slogan is designed to invoke historical myths and narratives of what or who Canada is. The slogan emblematically assumes, as a metanarrative, the mythologized national identity of Canada as distinctly “northern,” revealing itself to be a reproduction of banal nationalism in Canada in the process. It is, however, more than that: it is the appropriation of an imagined northern Canadian, and specifically Inuit or authentic northern (indigenous) identity. Something as seemingly innocuous and banal as a Canadian sports team’s slogan can manifest the enduring colonial legacy of Canada. Banal nationalism in Canada is anything but benign, and in the case of the Raptor’s highly appropriative slogan, dispossessive of Inuit identity and an enduring symbol of Canada’s colonial legacy. In the process of attempting to encapsulate the imagined Canadian national identity and fashion it into a metanarrative, the slogan appropriates the uniqueness that makes northerners and northern indigenous peoples what they are, northerners, and dispossesses them of facets of their identity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0260.044
Scholarly communication0.0120.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207