MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045897661 · doi:10.4324/9781315797663-14

National memory and museums: Remembering settler colonial genocide of Indigenous peoples in Canada

2014· article· en· W3045897661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tricia Logan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenocideColonialismIndigenousMetisHistoriographyContext (archaeology)HistoryLawPolitical scienceWildernessEthnologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During a 2009 speech to the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper made the now-famous statement that Canada has ‘no history of colonialism’. In the days following the G20 meeting, Harper’s representatives retracted his statement, claiming the use of ‘colonialism’ was taken out of context (Wherry 2009). The statement still infuriated Indigenous communities in Canada and illuminated a growing trend in Canada’s national memory. The Prime Minister’s remarks reminded Canadians that publicly or privately, national memories have blind spots when it comes to the real costs of building a nation. Ultimately, the First Nations, Metis and Inuit people in Canada1 are still paying an enormous price. Settler colonial crimes committed in the pursuit of ‘civilizing’ the ‘Canadian wilderness’ and establishing a powerful, economically viable nation are often erased or ignored, and Indigenous peoples are often instructed to ‘just get over it’ (Mahoney 2013). This chapter argues that revisions to national memory in Canada are not only long overdue, but could potentially aid in altering colonial mindsets. Misunderstood or misconceived definitions of settler colonial genocide inCanada and settler colonial genocide overall contribute to the lack of engagement by the non-Indigenous Canadian public. Settler colonial genocide is best known as a phenomenon that occurred in the United States or Australia (see Levene 2005: 69; Bloxham 2009: 283; Docker 2008: 94-96; Stannard 1993), and Canada is rarely mentioned. In Canada, Canadian historiography is critically flawed when it discusses genocide. Non-Indigenous Canadian historians regrettably use narrow definitions based on the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (UNGC). Narrow definitions of genocide as a singular event (rather than asmultiple events occurring over centuries) or based purely on ‘killing’ (rather than, for example, on the forcible removal of children) limit examination of Indigenous histories (McDonnell and Moses 2005). Settler colonial genocide is not addressed in Canadian museums, and it israrely addressed in Canadian mainstream historical narratives. Canada has created a mythology of nation-building and a national narrative that does not correspond to the realities of Indigenous peoples’ experiences. The obtrusive omission of settler colonial genocide in Canadian museums speaks to the wider omissions of genocide in Canadian history. Public histories in Canada and institutions like museums have a considerable distance to bridge in order for an agreement between Indigenous peoples’ accounts of history and public accounts of history to be reached. In museums like the Canadian Museum for Human Rights (CMHR), dueto open in Winnipeg in 2014, there exists a dominant narrative on genocide and human rights that features genocides perpetrated outside of Canada and the Americas. As the curator of Indigenous content at the CMHR, I was asked in July 2013 to remove the term genocide from the small exhibit on settler colonial genocide in Canada. While the museum itself relies heavily on a genocide narrative to build ‘encounters with human rights’, the dominant examples are the Holocaust and the Holodomor (the Ukrainian Famine 1932-1933). Atrocities against Indigenous peoples would remain in the museum, but I was no longer permitted to name them as genocide. Later in the chapter, I will draw on my own experience as the curator for Indigenous content at the CMHR to consider the way in which the experiences of Indigenous peoples are remembered in museums in Canada. I will first consider the question of settler colonial genocide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207