Settler Shock: Colonial Fetishism and the Disavowal of Violence in Contemporary 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 This article draws on an analysis of the consistent phenomenon of “settler shock”—the persistent invocations of surprise expressed by settler Canadians whenever there are reports of historical or ongoing violence against Indigenous Peoples—to articulate the dynamics of colonial fetishism and settler disavowal. It demonstrates how these expressions of shock are not, as they might appear, authentic responses to genuinely unknown events but rather are part of a system of discourses that conceal the violence of settler colonialism by erasing its continuities, displacing its violence into the past, and removing Indigenous subjects from the circle of “legitimate” citizens against whom military violence would be prohibited. In particular, it considers different forms of colonial disavowal—one that hinges on time, the other on political status—demonstrating how the fetishism of land as colonial property is the stabilizing force on which colonial disavowal rests. It ends by suggesting, however, that settler colonialism can never, in truth, be stabilized.
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 | 0.000 | 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