Humanities desk
< March 2	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 3

Educational facilities in Louisiana: Technical College part of Tech University?

Is Louisiana Technical College part of Louisiana Tech University?72.229.136.18 (talk) 03:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The template at the bottom of the University page has them in completely different sections, so I doubt that one is part of another. Paragon12321 (talk) 04:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A history of LTC on one of their web pages does not refer to the University. Conversely, according to Google search, there is no mention of LTC on the University's pages. Unlike what is suggested by our Louisiana Technical College article, Baton Rouge is just one of many campuses of LTC, others being West Jefferson, Jefferson, Sidney Collier, Slidell, Folkes, Jumonville, Westside, Lafourche–Galliano, Lafourche–Thibodaux, River Parishes, Young Memorial–Morgan City, Young Memorial–Franklin, Acadian, Charles B Coreil, Evangeline, Gulf Area, Lafayette, Teche Area, T H Harris, Alexandria, Avoyelles, Huey P. Long, Lamar Salter, Morgan Smith, Oakdale, Shelby M. Jackson, Mansfield, Natchitoches, Northwest, Sabine Valley, Shreveport Bossier, Bastrop, Delta Ouachita, North Central, Northeast, Ruston, Tallulah, Sullivan, Ascension, Florida Parishes, and Hammond. --Lambiam 15:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand parliament dates

What are the dates that each New Zealand parliament opened and dissolved? The articles on each individual parliament give unsourced dates, but most of them are redlinks. --superioridad ^(discusión) 10:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Castle to Castle

Has anyone read this? I can't make it out. Is it meant to be some kind of joke? Was Celine a fascist or not? 86.148.39.84 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To start with last question, see for a recent discussion of the issue Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 February 18#celine anti-semitism. While Céline was virulently anti-Semitic, and apparently attracted to fascist ideas, he was perhaps too much of an individualist to be a true adherent of hard-core fascism and Nazism, very anti-individualist ideologies. If you consider the human condition a joke, then Castle to Castle is a (not very good) rendering of that joke. But I don't think it is meant as a joke in the usual sense of the term. It gives you a more direct view on Céline's political thought than Journey to the End of the Night. --Lambiam 16:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can understand your obvious bafflement, 86.148. Just remember one thing: Céline was Céline: a misanthrope and cultural pessimist, who found in Fascism a way of giving some degree of coherence to his thoughts. But Lambian is absolutely right: he was far too eccentric; far too much of an individualist ever to be constrained by an ideological straightjacket. You see, Céline does not discriminate in the forms of prejudice he displays: he hates everybody, regardless of race or creed! I'm not quite sure I agree with Lambian's assessment of Castle to Castle, though. The sheer intensity of the prose, the machine-gun staccato of his delivery, the passion with which he carries his thoughts forward, displays to me the blackest of black humour and satanic irony, though I admit this may not have been the author's intention! Intentionally or not, he makes the absurd look absurd; and what better way of perceiving the dust of Vichy! Clio the Muse (talk) 00:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mussolini and socialism

Why did Mussolini abandon his socialist beliefs for a movement as anti-working class as fascism? 86.148.39.84 (talk) 14:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both are more anti-individual than anything else imho. —Tamfang (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mussolini was thrown out of the Partito Socialista Italiano in 1914, never a good way to endear a person, and certainly not Mussolini. As soon as he had a chance he had his Blackshirts torch the quarters of Avanti!, the daily newspaper of the PSI of which he had been editor only five years before. The ideology on which Italian fascism was based is national syndicalism, which is not explicitly anti-working class, but rather against the Marxist concept of class struggle, and therefore against socialism and communism. For common roots of Italian socialism and Italian fascism, see Fascio. --Lambiam 21:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might find it worthwhile to read a good biography of Mussolini; you might even find it worthwhile to read La mia vita, an autobiography which describes his life up until 1912, when he was twenty-eight and still a member of the Socialist Party. There is one passage in the latter that I would draw your attention to, where he says-"I am a restless man, with a wild temperament...". This is the key to the man and to his whole political persona. Intellectually the sources of his inspiration extended beyond the usual Marxist texts, to the work of people like Gustave Le Bon, whose Psychology of the Crowd was a particular favourite, to George Sorel, the prophet of revolutionary syndicalism; and, above all, to that of Friedrich Nietzsche. In 1908 he wrote an essay, The Philosophy of Force, published in the Republican weekly, Il Pensiero romagnolo, which illustrates well the direction his thought was heading;

The 'super man' is the great Nietzschean creation...Nietzsche has wrung the bell of an imminent return of the ideal. But it is an ideal fundamentally different from those in which past generations believed. To understand it, there will come 'free spirits' of a new kind fortified by war, by solitude, by great danger, spirits who will have experienced the wind, the ice, the snows of the mountains and will know how to measure with a serene eye the depth of the abysses-spirits equipped with a kind of sublime wickedness-spirits who will liberate us from the love of our neighbour, from the desire for the void giving back to the earth its purpose and to men their hope-new, free spirits who will triumph over God and over the Void!

Now, could you imagine Lenin writing that?! Mussolini was never going to be confined by the pedestrian politics of Italian socialism, by its caution and by its narrow parliamentary horizons. He was a revolutionary in the most complete sense of the term. After the expulsion of the reformist wing from the Socialist Party in 1912, an action in which Mussolini played a central part, Il Nuovo Giornale noted: "The theory of Professor Mussolini was somewhat mad...but he was a truly original thinker." In the end Fascism was to be his original madness; not opposed to the working-class as such, but to the fiction of left-wing internationalism, which had collapsed in the summer of 1914, spinning his mind off in new directions. Clio the Muse (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Franco a fascist?

Was Franco a fascist or not? 86.148.39.84 (talk) 14:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By most definitions of fascism both his ideology and his regime would be considered fascist. The ideology underlying fascism in its original form (which does not include National Socialism with its racist preoccupations) is national syndicalism, and a fascist regime is then an authoritarian regime whose policies are informed by that ideology. By that definition, the Falange and the Franco regime were definitely fascist. --Lambiam 15:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not believe he was. He was a caudillo, a phenomenon of the Spanish-speaking world, to be found time and again across the history of the nineteenth century, in Europe and America. It's just that his particular Pronunciamento came at a time when all such actions had to be viewed in twentieth century terms, giving the whole thing, insofar as it was a challenge to a a left-wing government, Fascist ideological overtones. But it might help you to understand the difference between Franco's 'Fascism', 86.148, if you compare it with that of Mussolini and Hitler, particularly in the way in which each attained power.

In Italy the Fascist state was built on an alliance between radicals and reactionaries, with a slight advantage, to begin with, to the former. But in 1943 the reactionaries, the cliques around the the King, gathered sufficient strength to overthrow Mussolini. In Germany Hitler attained power on the basis of a similar alliance, though the conservative elements were far weaker than the radical. In 1944 the failure of a conservative reaction saw the complete triumph of the most radical forms of Fascism. In Spain the Falange radicals were always weaker than the conservative forces behind Franco. In the end, though the only official party allowed after the Civil War, it was entirely subordinated to a conservative dictatorship, providing little more than an increasingly irrelevant ideological gloss. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But, but: Franco was fond of Hitler and vice versa, and he fought against communists and socialists and internationalists, and the Abraham Lincoln Brigade fought against Franco, then in 1971 marched against Nixon's Vietnam policies. Surely there is Fascism by association? ;<) Edison (talk) 03:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, Hitler was so fond of Franco that after their meeting in October 1940 at Hendaye he said he would rather have teeth pulled than go through another such interview! Clio the Muse (talk) 03:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rumor has it that Franco didn't refuse flat out to enter WWII at the side of the Germans. He cunningly made a couple of impossible requests. One of them was half of all the German petrol and Hitler refused. Franco a fascist? Certainly. Flamarande (talk) 03:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where to find Frank O'Connor's Downfall of Heathendom in print?

The subject says it all really. Would anyone know which of Frank O'Connor's books The Downfall of Heathendom - a verse translation of part of the prefatory poem from the martyrology of Aengus the Culdee - was published in? There's a literal translation can be found in Whitley Stokes's edition of the martyrology here at the Internet Archive, but a verse one would be handy. TIA, Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On this page concerning The Martyrology of Oengus the Culdee I found a reference to:

David Greene and Frank O'Connor, A golden treasury of Irish poetry (London 1967; repr. Dingle 1990) sections 10--11, pages 56--59, 61--64 (36 quatrains from the Prologue).

Google books gives two editions (Macmillan 1967 ISBN 0333045033, Brandon 1990 ISBN 0863221130) without previews. Amazon.com also offers no preview. --Lambiam 16:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. That's what I was hoping the answer was. Cheers! Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

history in mass communication

should a course in history of mass communication be taught in the school of journalism or in the department of history? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.49.87.170 (talk) 15:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both seem appropriate. It is reasonable that aspiring journalists, especially those who will engage in some form of mass communication, should know something of the history of mass communication. And in principle, for any topic T with a history, it is (in principle) appropriate to teach the history of T in a department of history (although this would be a specialist topic that might fall outside the scope of the particular studies offered by a given department). In all cases, I assume this would be an elective. --Lambiam 17:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Often such courses are cross-referenced, one course with two course listings. Personally, though, I would expect the tone of the course to probably be set by the disciplinary affiliation of the professor. It is very common for the "same subject" to be taught very differently; e.g. a historian teaches the history of physics often very differently than a physicist would. --140.247.152.94 (talk) 19:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crowds and Power

I went first to the page on the writer Elias Canetti to look for an answer to my question but it is really very disappointing. My question is this-can Canetti's book Crowds and Power tell us anything about the nature and purpose of present day Islamic militancy? I hope this is the right place for this question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gail Hunter (talk • contribs) 16:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is imperative to make a distinction between militant Islamism – which is not necessarily violent – and Islamic terrorism – terrorism that seeks its justification in Islam. What you can learn from Canetti that may be relevant in this context is the need of individuals to belong to a group (a "crowd" or Masse in Canetti's terminology), how a group will seek to destroy those who threaten its existence, and how the need of the individual to "disappear in the crowd" may be manipulated by a small group to attain power. But I don't see how that might more or less directly tell you anything about the nature (and even less so of the purpose) of Islamic militancy in whatever form. It may, perhaps, serve as a theoretical frame, a context in which to formulate and conduct an investigation of the issues. --Lambiam 16:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Crowds and Power, Gail? The answer to your question might, perhaps, be found in Islam is a Religion of War, a sub-section of The Pack and Religion. I think one quotation will suffice;

The bi-partition of the crowd in Islam is unconditional. The faithful and the unbelieving are fated to be separate for ever. The war of religion is a sacred duty and thus, though in a less comprehensive form, the double crowd of the Last Judgment is prefigured in every earthly battle. (1981 Penguin edition, pp.164-5). Clio the Muse (talk) 02:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Navvies: are they Irish?

After re-acquainting myself with the XTC song "Towers of London" over the weekend, I wanted to read up a bit more on the navvies referenced therein. Our article is not great, and I noticed that a sentence that had once read "Many navvies were immigrants ... and were mainly Irish" was changed a few months ago to say "... and some were Irish." That change seems to have blunted the sentence somewhat, so I was simply wondering if it is commonly believed that navvy = Irish ? --LarryMac | Talk 19:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't this have something to do with the potato famine and a wave of migration from Ireland particularily with reference to the building of the railways and canals in the UK. see Irish migration to Britain.

I think it should read 'many were Irish' but don't have the absolute facts to make the change.87.102.93.158 (talk) 21:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The association is common - particularily in the Irish=manual labour direction http://www.movinghere.org.uk/galleries/histories/irish/working_lives/working_lives.htm There are numerous jokes involving irishmen and wheelbarrows - perhaps you can recall one?87.102.93.158 (talk) 21:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rough alike in morals and in manners, collected from the wild hills of Yorkshire and Lancashire, coming in troops from the fens of Lincolnshire, and afterwards pouring in masses from every country in the empire; displaying an unbending vigour and an independent bearing; mostly dwelling apart from the villagers near whom they worked; with all the strong propensities of an untaught, undisciplined nature; unable to read and unwilling to be taught; impetuous, impulsive, and brute-like; regarded as the pariahs of private life, herding together like beasts of the field, owning no moral law and feeling no social tie, they increased with an increased demand, and from thousands grew to hundreds of thousands. They lived but for the present; they cared not for the past; they were indifferent to the future. They were a wandering people, who only spoke of God to wonder why he had made some so rich and others so poor; and only heard of a coming state to hope that there they might cease to be railway labourers. They were heathens in the heart of a Christian people; savages in the midst of civilisation: and it is scarcely an exaggeration to say, that a feeling something akin to that which awed the luxurious Roman when the Goth was at his gates, fell on the minds of those English citizens near whom the railway labourer pitched his tent. Francis, John. (1851). A History of the English Railway Vol II. pp. 68-9.

In the 1840s and 1850s with the exception of those employed in agriculture and textiles, navvies made up the largest occupational group in Britain. An average of 60,000 men were engaged annually in railway construction between 1831 and 1870 or about 1 per cent of the occupied male labour force. Construction booms led to sudden surges in demands for labour, and especially for unskilled labourers, who made up over 80 per cent of those recruited. During 1847 some 6,455 miles of line were being built by over 256,000 men, 4 per cent of the male workforce. The annual wages in 1845-9 were about £11 million, or 2 per cent of the national product. It is little wonder that to the communities upon which they descended, they were an army. Brown, R. (1991). Society and economy in modern Britain, 1700-1850. p. 240. OCLC 21146703

The term navigator had by this time a general and a special meaning. There were the gangs of experienced men who had professional skill and commanded a corresponding wage, the navvies proper, and there were the rough diggers of the rank and file. "As far as my experience goes," said a Scottish witness, "in Scotland we have not yet any of the class of people called navigators; they are generally mere labourers who come for the occasion, and probably do not return to that sort of work afterwards." For the most part they were Highlanders or Irishmen. In the North of England "perhaps one-half of the navigators," in the wider sense, were Irish; but in the South, where rural population was denser and rural wages lower, most of the labour was local. The South Devon Railway, for example, was being built in 1846 principally by Dorset, Somerset, Wilts and Devon men who had worked their way down along the line of the Great Western. There were a few, but "very few," North-country men and the Irish are not mentioned. Nor were there at that time any of the specially expert navvies on the works. Such men wanted something like 5s. a day, and work was being done in South Devon at rates varying from:2s. 6d. to 4s. 3d., the maximum being paid to "miners" on tunnelling, which was really an expert's job. The 5s. experts were only called in to do jobs of special difficulty, or when it was necessary to work against time: the "contractor generally knows where to put his hand on a body of these men." Occasionally they formed a large proportion of the working staff. The five thousand Englishmen who made the Paris-Rouen railway were mostly "true navigators," for, as the contractor explained, "we had some long tunnels." These were the men whose meat-eating and day's work so astonished the French. Their wages, even in England about double those of an average unskilled labourer, left a wide margin for steak, plush waistcoats, and whisky. What proportion they formed of the whole body of the railway makers it is impossible to ascertain; but the evidence suggests that, at least in 1844-8, that proportion was not high, since whole railways managed without them. Clapham, J. H. (1930). An economic history of modern Britain: the early railway age 1820-1850. pp. 406-7. OCLC 59919084

Amongst the unskilled the Irish predominated, especially in the north of England and the lowlands of Scotland. In the construction of railways further south redundant agricultural labour was more frequently employed. A witness before a Select Committee in 1827 declared that in any job where there was extensive excavation work he would ‘not feel in the least surprised to find, that of 100 men employed in it, 90 were Irish’. Bagwell, P. S. (1988). The transport revolution. p. 91. OCLC 59978006

—eric 22:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LarryMac, you might also have a look at The Railway Navvies: the History of the Men Who Made the Railways by Terry Coleman. It's a good read, covering all aspects of the lives of these 'aristocrats of labour'. I particularly enjoyed the descriptions of their mass rampages! Many were indeed Irish; but more were English and Scots. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating stuff, eric, and I'll search for that book, Clio. Certainly Mr. John Francis seems not to have been enamored of these "heathens". I will leave the Wikipedia article as is for now, flawed though it may be, and do some more research. Hmmmm, nearly 30 years of simply humming along with that song before finally investigating the lyrics, and now I'm going to have to learn something. Thank you. --LarryMac | Talk 13:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Louise Strong on Mao

I would like to know why the American journalist Anna Louise Strong's 'The Thought of Mao Tse Tung' and 'Dawn out of China' were so badly received by the Kremlin? ZZT9 (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Because she suggested that there was another way of looking at the world, different, that is, from the vision of Stalin. Statements like Mao 'changed Marxism from a European to an Asiatic form' or 'all Asia will learn from China more than than they will learn from the USSR' were never going to be favoured reading in Moscow! Clio the Muse (talk) 02:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Smith

What were th negative impacts on the ideas of Adam Smith? Invisible hand and division of the labor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 21:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They lead to more wealth, with the arguably negative side effects of materialism and decadence. See those articles for more information. User:Krator (t c) 21:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really mean "negative impacts on the ideas of Adam Smith", as in "what negative events in Adam Smith's life influenced his ideas", or possibly "what dissuaded Adam Smith from free expression"? Or you mean "negative impacts of the ideas of Adam Smith"? --M @r ē ino 00:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None; it's all good!. However, it has to be said that Smith's economic model never operated in in all of its Platonic purity, not even for him, as you will see if you read The Theory of Moral Sentiments alongside The Wealth of Nations. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ethics and values?

What would be a good way to define personal, societal and professional values? Any good sites regarding them in healthcare? 172.203.147.196 (talk) 21:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to start with our article on medical ethics. The article has dozens of sources and references from which you can quickly figure out the leading opinions, or even begin to form your own value system. --M @r ē ino 00:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Constitutionality of referring to God in schools

can a teacher in a public school discipline you for saying "oh my god" or any other phrase with the word god in it because does not want any one disrespecting her lord and god in her class room —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.94.8 (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously they can. Whether or not it is appropriate or legal for them to do so is another matter, but it's nothing to do with constitutionality; you can't take someone to court for breaching your "constitutional rights". The constitution doesn't constrain individuals, it only constrains laws and official processes of the government. FiggyBee (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

42 USC § 1983 "under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage"?—eric 22:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the teacher is constrained because she is employed by the government. There is master-servant liability. It looks as though a strong First Amendment case can be argued. To actually answer the question, though, is legal advice, which we are not permitted to do. It is much harder to determine constitutionality than it first appears. Where this happened is important, too.

75Janice (talk) 22:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)75Janice[reply]

In the unlikely case that such a ridiculous case could make it to any form of court - who knows what the outcome would be. From a logical position - a teacher holds the 'power' in a classroom, so it is their discretion around what language they allow from students. If they believe a student is using language purposefully to create a scene/insult others/cause negative sentiment then they may feel that the action justifies some form of discipline. Few would consider that unreasonable. If blasphemy (is that the term?) were used in general conversation between two students with no malice/intent of insulting others then more people would probably consider any discipline to be unfair/unreasonable given the circumstances. Context is hugely important to the validity of anything to do with language. ny156uk (talk) 23:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The teacher is constrained by the First Amendment b/c of the first Amendment. The particular circumstances, the policy of the school board, where this occurred and how many times are important factual questions. It boils down to giving legal advice. I am certain something similar has been addressed in cases. Whether those cases control the result is an another matter. It is a legal question. I just desired to clarify that when teachers act as teachers and not private citizens the constitution is applied.75Janice (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)75Janice75Janice (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of misconceptions out there about separation of church and state and U.S. schools. Schools can teach about religion. They can have Bibles in the school library. They can rent out facilities to religious groups before or after school. What they can't do is use school resources to promote religion or force students to take part in a religious exercise. So while it's OK for students to gather before school on their own initiative and pray, the school can't organize a prayer assembly or teach the Bible as fact. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment has always been interpreted more broadly than the Establishment Clause. Having spent last year researching Establishment Clause law, user Mwalcoff provides a good summary. I found the cases tainted by political concerns not found in other cases. Establishment Clause violations are subjective. The result is determined, in my opinion, not so much by jurisprudence as by the particular judge who hears the case. --75Janice (talk) 19:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is flirting illegal in New York?

A website (http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/new-york) says so. Thanks. Imagine Reason (talk) 23:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would be leery of these trivia websites. I doubt that a police officer will pull you over for wearing slippers past 10 PM, in this liberal day and age. bibliomaniac 1 5 I see no changes 23:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed about the problems with trivia websites. I'll add that I personally witnessed thousands of violations of this law when I was in New York, many of them in the plain view of the NYPD, with no legal consequences. --M @r ē ino 00:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Often they stretch a legal provision to its most absurd limit in order to make it a "dumb law". If you manage to find the actual provision, usually it is quite reasonable and makes perfect sense. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I certainly wasn't worried about being confronted by a cop for flirting in the state. But we do have stupid, outdated laws, so I was just wondering. Imagine Reason (talk) 01:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Dumb laws. Newspaper writers would sometimes take a law which said "Animals may not be tethered to fire hydrants" (Yeah, a sensible law, since it might slow the connection of fire hoses) and add it to a "dumb laws" article by taking an extreme instanciation: "In Miami, Florida, it is illegal to tether an ostrich to a fire hydrant" (yeah, an ostrich is an animal). Look for a sensible law with a silly sounding instanciation. Like "Murder is illegal in Tennessee" being changed to "It is illegal to beat someone to death with a printout of Wikipedia in Nashville." Edison (talk) 03:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also note the difference between a "law on the books" and an "enforced law". For example, where I live it is illegal to make a left-hand turn at a red light. However, if you are on a one-way road turning left onto a one-way road, that particular law is not enforced. Nowhere is there a disclaimer to the "no-left on red" law. It is simply not enforced by the police. Similarly, they do not enforce the "no spitting" law. All our roads and sidewalks are paved now. When they were all dirt, you definitely didn't want a bunch of people spitting on the ground as they walked. You ended up with a sticky muddy mess. Instead of going through the hassle of paying lawyers and politicians to take the law off the books, the police simply do not enforce it. -- kainaw ™ 03:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I said we have stupid laws, that was what I was thinking--uneforced laws. Like the interracial marriage ban repealed several years ago in Alabama and South Carolina, or Article 19 of the constitution of the state of Arkansas: "No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court."[1] I hope they're not enforced, anyway. Imagine Reason (talk) 14:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not flirting in New York, but FYI as of last month it became illegal in South Africa for anyone under 16 to kiss in public. No, this isn't a joke. So far though noone's been arrested and frankly I think the police have too much else on their hands. Zun aid ©® 15:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Such kind of laws are so sad. Instead of trying to solve true problems (like crime, unemployment, and rampant corruption) governments waste their time creating retarded laws which the police and the courts are not going to apply anyway because they still follow the rules of common sense. Flamarande (talk) 18:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The solution may be imperfect, but there is a real problem of sexual abuse of young children by older children. The law states that such "sexual violations" are not an offence if consensual and the perps differ by no more than 2 years in age. --Lambiam 02:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know someone in South Africa. The crime problem there is overwhelming. From his accounts as well as just what I read online, if you're a female, I'd strongly advise going there, period. Imagine Reason (talk) 02:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On average, crime (and especially violent crime) in South Africa is much higher than in other parts of the world, but, as with every other country on this planet, there are good areas and bad areas. You wouldn't want to be caught in one of the seedier suburbs of New York, for example. But that's as much as I'm going to say, this is a whole new topic on its own. (p.s. I think you wanted to advise against coming here?) Zun aid ©® 14:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry for the typo. =P I must disagree with your assertion, though. While the worst places in inner-city New York may be compared to South Africa, ~~you'll find few places where even the surroundings of posh hotels are not immune to gruesome crimes~~^{easily contradicted, but I stand by my other statements}. Imagine Reason (talk) 02:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]