Dǫ nàke làànı nàts’etso: A critical review of self-government implementation in Canada’s North
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last forty years, modern treaties have become one of the most popular arrangements for redefining the relationship between Canada and Indigenous peoples. Canada views modern treaties as means to achieving certainty respecting ownership, use and management of lands and resources. It is also used as a means of achieving reconciliation by redefining the relationship with Indigenous peoples as one based on mutual respect, recognition, and cooperation. Some Indigenous Nations view modern treaties a means for protecting and promoting their unique languages, cultures and ways of life. Canada’s rhetoric around modern treaties suggests that there is value in this new legal arrangement. Upon closer inspection it appears that modern treaties may just be an extension of the racist, paternalistic, oppressive policies of the past. This research asks the question how does modern treaty implementation affect the ultimate value of modern treaties as a mechanism for protecting sovereignty, language, culture and way of life? Drawing on critical theory and a materialist perspective this work offers an analysis of the on the ground implementation of self-government using the Tłı̨chǫ Treaty as a case study. By deploying theories of totalization and primitive accumulation this work demonstrates that in its current form, the implementation of self-government seeks to transform Indigenous economic structures and define and control the delivery of programs and services in Indigenous communities. Although Indigenous peoples continue to resist, if there is never relief from this oppression, self-government implementation has the potential to do irreparable harm to Indigenous peoples’ cultures and way of life. This work argues that if Canada and Canadians truly seek to undo the harms caused by colonization and to achieve reconciliation, they need to relinquish control over Indigenous lives, lands and governments. New legal instruments do little to resolve the injustice and just serve to be yet another distraction which consumes the resources of Indigenous governments. Ultimately, Indigenous peoples will need to shift attention away from engaging with the state and instead focus their attention inward, asserting their rights to lands and sovereignty to protect their unique culture and way of life.
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 | 0.019 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 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".