Indigenous Reintegrative Shaming: A Comparison of Indigenous Legal Traditions of Canada and Braithwaite's Theory of Reintegrative Shaming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upon the arrival of European settlers in Canada, Indigenous legal traditions have continuously been undermined as customary law with an insignificant role in crime prevention and sanctioning. This paper will argue that Indigenous legal traditions deserve a larger role in Indigenous self-governance as their customs demonstrate aspects of crucial crime prevention theories such as Braithwaite’s theory of reintegrative shaming. The interconnection between reintegrative shaming and Indigenous legal traditions pre-contact and post-contact demonstrate concepts of community socialization, informal sanctions and restorative practices that foster the wellbeing of the community, victims and offenders. As such, Braithwaite’s theory demonstrates the importance of each of these behaviors in regards to decreasing recidivism and differential association of offenders. Overall, this paper hopes to recognize the interconnection between criminological theories of crime prevention and the customary practices of Canadian Indigenous communities for the purposes of respecting practices that have previously been disregarded in settler society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".