Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book explores the processes by which settler colonial authority was established over the Indigenous peoples of south-west Australia and prairie Canada.These former sites of the British Empire and the nature of their settlement histories have much in common, but they also differ in telling ways; most of all, in both their similarities and their differences, they reveal the challenges that confronted liberal imperialism in its dealings with Indigen ous subjects.This study focuses on the period between the 1830s and 1914, which includes the era that James Belich describes as the "Anglosettler revolution" of the long nineteenth century.Characterized by the explosive colonization of territories of the non-contiguous British West, this settler revolution profoundly reconfigured the nature and extent of the Anglo world.Accompanying this massive increase of settler populations in that world was a transformation in the ideology of empire toward the liberal rule of law, which included at its heart a new level of concern with the "civilization" and "protection" of Indigenous peoples.In aspiring to their incorporation as subjects of the Crown, the liberal humanitarian framework of imperial policy that took formal shape in Britain from the 1830s was predicated on the erasure of Indigenous people's cultural differences and the expectation of their eventual amalgamation into the body of the colonizing state.If, in the words of Patrick Wolfe, settler colonialism was "a structure not an event," then what was its architecture?In engaging this question, this book sets out to examine the legal and institutional processes that shaped efforts to assert sovereignty and secure jurisdiction over
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".