MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236772328 · doi:10.46692/9781447356424.006

State Violence Against Children in British Empire and Former Settler Colonies

2020· other· en· W4236772328 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireState (computer science)CriminologyAncient historyHistoryPolitical scienceLawSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Council is fully persuaded of the importance of prompt action in order to prevent the growth of a race that would rapidly increase in numbers, attain a maturity without education or religion, and become a menace to the morals and health of the community. (State's Children Council, Australia, 1911, cited in Smallwood, 2015: 68) Introduction Generally speaking, a state is considered the guarantor of protection and safety for the people living within its borders or subjected to its sovereignty. Yet history is full of examples in which state authorities not only neglect their responsibility toward at-risk people, but also actively contribute to threatening and endangering the lives of these individuals. This can be observed especially within state policies towards people considered ‘foreign’, or whose benefit towards society is questioned. In this chapter, some historical examples will be reviewed in which children have been affected by such marginalizing state policies, the consequences of which can still be felt today. Since the emergence of nation states in the 18th century, children have been attributed a special significance for the future of societies. States recognize their need for protection, and measures are taken to provide for their education and learning. However, the notion that nation state formation is often accompanied by processes of marginalization, on the one hand, and violent assimilation practices, on the other, is often overlooked (Anderson, 2006; Douglas, 2002). This occurs especially in instances where ‘national identity’ is ambiguous (Appadurai, 2006). In such cases, children may experience systematic persecution, abuse and denial of citizenship. Here, the question emerges whether the state ‘merely’ neglects its obligation to protect children, or actively contributes to their abuse and endangerment. There is a fine line between the two. The cases of state violence discussed here can be understood as a form of colonization of children (Ashcroft, 2001; Cannella and Viruru, 2004; Liebel, 2017). They are not limited to the ideological upbringing of children (assimilation), but rather extend to forms of disciplining, exclusion, oppression and even genocide, or ‘ideocide’. Systematic violence against children was undertaken in two particular ways in the British Empire and in the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.262
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207