A Legacy of Exploitation: Early Capitalism in the Red River Colony, 1763–1821. By Susan Dianne Brophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Such is the power of this book that is brings new life to the well-worn, even thread bare, narrative of the early days of the Red River colony. Using an unabashed dialectical materialist framework, Brophy’s careful analysis provides a powerful reinterpretation of the evolution of the colony through the emerging lens of settler colonial studies. Rather than the mechanistic outcomes of dependency theory and its inevitable “fatalistic metamorphosis into a wage labouring proletariat,” the author highlights the relative though uneven autonomy of Indigenous communities especially the Métis in their role as food providers to the fledgling and often floundering European settlement (p. 50). In uncovering the “social relations of land” (p. 178), Brophy goes beyond the pure economic coercion of earlier Marxist studies opening the way for an understanding of an ongoing conflict over land, arguing that draconian measures like the Indian Act, residential schools and other policies increasingly being described as genocidal are not driven simply by economic coercion in the settler colonial context but rather by social control.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".