How the Protestant Work Ethic Injures the Indigenous Peoples of Turtle Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It’s only been a very short time since the occident began to think of religion as something distinct from the Commonwealth's governing body. Likewise, to believe that Canada's labor policy is somehow divorced from those roots, and to think in terms of a divide between political social ideas and religion would have been, until very recently, an audacious point of view. Therefore, the purpose of this essay, will be to look at how the political objectives of North Western Canada's labor policies were derived from conceptions of work rooted in religious ideology. This essay argues that North Western Canada's labor policies are inflected by an economy of knowledge that ideologically injures and challenges Indigenous people’s relationships to the earth using religiously defined ideas including the ubiquitous concept of the Protestant work ethic. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate how the contemporary conception of work became defined by the Apostolic Protestant work ethic expressed in various symbolic associations including the figure of the ox. This essay demonstrates why the metaphysical analogy associated with oxen is useful to weaponization of Apostolic notions of work; designed to destroy Indigenous people’s relationship to the earth. This paper draws upon historical evidence that shows that since ancient times, labor has been weaponized against earthly Indigenous lifeways. Central to this essay is how Canada's North Western magistrate policies have weaponized the religious economy of knowledge called the Protestant work ethic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".