Violence That Dispossesses: Continuity on the Settler Colonial Timeline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article considers what role and responsibility historians may have when faced with settler society’s tendency to be freshly shocked each time it learns (again) about a colonial horror from its past that was, in fact, already long well known by many. Following an introduction, my argument unfolds in five sections. First, I engage a mostly Indigenous scholarship to suggest replotting British Columbia’s timeline as a continuum, or continuous process, of ongoing violence that illuminates connections across myriad forms of violence. Second, I reflect on an earlier, mostly non-Indigenous historiography about physical force and violence in British Columbia. Third, with this scholarship as context, I use an experimental format to present a catalogue of dispossession drawn from transcripts of the Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia (1913–1916). These accounts demonstrate that settlers relied on physical violence during the foundational pre-emption and Crown granting processes to an extent that warrants greater attention. Fourth, I suggest that some important implications follow from this for understandings of British Columbia’s past and present. Fifth, I argue that taking the long view of settler-on-Indigenous violence as a continuum helps clarify connections among forms of violence, particularly in relation to the materiality of forced physical dispossession, and, in so doing, moves us closer to telling histories that are not just for the winners.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".