Challenging the new Canadian myth : colonialism, post-colonialism, and urban Aboriginal policy in Thompson and Brandon, Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If one were to take a brief look around most contemporary cities in Manitoba, including those outside of Winnipeg, one would likely see that all is not well in the delicate relationship between the Canadian state and Aboriginal peoples.Academics studying this have diagnosed several issues each of which accounts for some of the challenges plaguing this relationship.While some authors look to jurisdictional indecision and a Iack of constitutional clarity as the culprits, others argue these troubles are more closely related a more fundamental issue, notably the lack of recognition of the right to self- determination for Aboriginal peoples, urban or otherwise.In Manitoba, Winnipeg has received a great deal of academic attention in this matter; however, smaller regional centres have not been as thoroughly studied.Using data gathered from in-depth interviews in Thompson and Brandon, Manitoba, this thesis suggests that the issues identified thus far by academics may all have merit, but that most fail to identiff the underlying issues that to this day deeply influence the Canadian state- Aboriginal relationship.This thesis, therefore, contends that it is colonialism, with its constituent elements of racism and unbalanced power relations, that is acting subtly behind the scenes of contemporary urban Aboriginal public policy in small Manitoban cities.The form that colonialism has taken in the contemporary Canadian policy landscape may not be clearly organized or effectively orchestrated, but its foundational parts are still very much active.' for their valuable comments and criticisms that have made this thesis better.I know you are busy individuals, and I very much appreciate the time you have taken to help me through this process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.045 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".