The crossroads of oil: perpetuation of settler colonialism based in Native American treaties and sustained through the construction and protection of oil pipelines in the American Great Lakes region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis focuses on structures of international law and Native American treaties that were drafted throughout the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries and how they directly affect today’s energy infrastructure standards. These Native American land rights treaties stemming back to the mid eighteenth century were the initial legal renderings that imposed Euro-American ideals of private property ownership on the Great Lakes region, and its already established peoples, in the long process of settler-colonialism of the Americas. The two new nation-states of the United States and Canada were wrought from, and took shape on, what was already lands home to indigenous groups. The generalized rights of the US and Canadian governments to these lands and their resources has led to the socialization, acculturation, and acceptance of limitless extraction and transportation of nonrenewable resources. Tracing the historical and ‘legal’ roots of land appropriation is reflective of and vital to understanding the current battle that is taking place between multinational energy companies, the national governments of the US and Canada, and Native American tribes with environmental advocacy groups, over the continued operation of oil pipelines within the greater context of the climate crisis and the proliferation of crude oil pipelines.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".