MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384153906 · doi:10.32920/23681481.v1

Threats from Within and Threats from Without: Wet’suwet’en Protesters, Irregular Asylum Seekers and the On-Going Reproduction of Settler Colonialism in Canada

2023· preprint· en· W4384153906 on OpenAlexaffabout
Magdalena Perzyna

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeIndigenousColonialismTamilState (computer science)SovereigntyPolitical scienceSecuritizationImmigrationLawState of exceptionSociologyCriminologyGender studiesMedia studiesPoliticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>This essay seeks to address the'immigrant-Aboriginal parallax gap' by considering the ways in which the popular media frames Indigenous protesters and irregular asylum seekers. Using the work of previous studies of Oka/Kanasatake, Ipperwash and Caledonia and the irregular boat arrivals of Fujian and Tamil asylum seekers, it identifies similarities in the ways that each group was racialized, criminalized, delegitimized and constructed as the 'Other' in the popular media. Employing the theoretical frameworks of settler colonialism and securitization theory, it goes on to examine whether the same frames persist in contemporary representations using the case studies of Wet’suwet’en protesters and irregular asylum seekers crossing the border at Roxham Road. A comparative discourse analysis finds that the media continues to frame Indigenous protesters and irregular asylum seekers as threats to the 'rule of law' and the 'common good',</p> <p>reconstituting acts that are fundamentally rights affirming --including the right to peaceful protest and the right to claim asylum-- into threats to Canada's sovereignty, thus necessiating state action.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Security and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207