Historical justice and reparation for Indigenous Peoples in Brazil and Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The struggle of Indigenous Peoples for historical justice and reparation has gained visibility with the truth commissions' work in Brazil and Canada. Their final reports confirmed the Canadian and Brazilian states' responsibility for the genocide of thousands of Indians. To start a reconciliation process, several redress recommendations were made, but never fully accomplished. We observed repeated violence acts against Indigenous Peoples in both countries more than five years after these recommendations were published. The purpose of this article is to evaluate, from the Critical Studies of Transitions’ perspective, the reconciling and reparative scope of the Truth Commissions of Brazil and Canada and to analyze the difficulties of implementing their recommendations. We show that despite promises to transform colonial relations, these Truth Commissions have been unable to address the past and the continuity of structural violence affecting Indigenous Peoples.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it