Humanities desk
< August 5	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 7 >

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.

August 6

Countries where nationalism or patriotism is/was discouraged.

I was wondering if there are/were any countries where, at some point in time, nationalism and/or patriotism, or at least ultra-nationalism and ultra-patriotism, is/was frowned upon, or at least wasn't that prominent. Have there ever been such places? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on what you mean by ulta-nationalism. If you mean groups like the British National Party or the English Defence League in the UK, and equivalents elsewhere, then they are often very much frowned upon by the mainstream. --Tango (talk) 00:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As in the ones that many Americans seem to follow, especially the political analysts and the right-wing politicians. Also, that includes the attitude of calling your country the "greatest". Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Soviets under Lenin and Stalin were antinationalist due to promotion of the ideals of the international brotherhood of workers. There was an abrupt change after the nazis invaded though, with Stalin calling on the soldiers to act in defence of Mother Russia. 112.215.36.177 (talk) 00:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that's a good example. Certain nationalisms were discouraged, while others were carefully channeled and controlled, but Soviet patriotism and blind faith in the leadership of the Soviet Communist party were strongly inculcated. By the way, one feature of Stalin's Soviet Union was that certain passages of Marx, Engels, and Lenin on Tsarist Russian imperialism were not allowed to be printed! (So much for the "complete" edition of Marx's works.) AnonMoos (talk) 00:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Russian nationalism and Socialism in One Country. It's the best example of the state rejecting nationalism that you're ever likely to find. 112.215.36.185 (talk) 05:28, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good example of rejecting the ethnic nationalism of the largest or most significant ethnic group in a state (though hardly unique -- the Ottoman empire didn't significantly encourage Turkish nationalism in the modern sense until 1908). However, it's a poor example when it comes to rejecting ideas of collective loyalty and loyalty to the leaders of a state (since fervent loyalty to the Soviet Union and the Bolshevik party was highly encouraged). AnonMoos (talk) 19:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose that's a good example of a majority not needing to install its own national patriotism, because it could rely on some sort of 'state patriotism' which would protect its own culture and heritage. In that sense, many countries have discouraged minority patriotism (seen as separatism) and attempted to promote the culture and language of the majority. Examples that come to mind are the many hill tribes in SE Asia, which have been encouraged to adopt a Thai/Lao/Burmese identity (with strong patriotism) instead of their own. Though, of course, there are other countries where the forced assimilation of minorities have taken place, such as with the Sámi of Scandinavia. V85 (talk) 16:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also relevent is Bourgeois nationalism, which in theory Marxist/communist countries would ascribe to; the idea that nationalism was anti-communist by its nature. The ideal Marxist state was anti-nationalist. Sadly, in practice this worked out very differently. At first, the Soviet Union tried to support world-wide communism by promoting local nationalism in its various constituent republics, see Korenizatsiya. This didn't last long, and instead it proceeded on a policy of Russification. --Jayron32 06:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Britain during much of the 1920's and 1930's, there was a strong reaction against the propaganda and jingoistic patriotism of WW1 (contrasted with the meaninglessness of much of the WW1 fighting), so an ostentatious anti-patriotism was fashionable in certain university circles, and it was famously debated at the Oxford Union that they would "in no circumstances fight for... King and Country". Kim Philby came out of this environment. AnonMoos (talk) 00:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There have been plenty of self-hating countries, Weimar Germany, Vichy France, Britain under the Labour Party (UK). Germany and Japan banned the symbols of their prior regimes after WWII. They no longer sing Deutschland Ueber Alles do they? Although that is due, of course, to the US-lead victory of the allies, the US being, objectively, the greatest country in world history, with no need to prove it. μηδείς (talk) 02:50, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They still use the third stanza of the Deutschlandlied as the national anthem, but the first stanza would not be appropriate as the places mentioned no longer form the boundaries of Germany. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 17:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the composer Joseph Haydn was what we today call Austrian, and it was written in honour of the Kaiser of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, has never stopped Germany using any part of the anthem. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 20:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Britain under the Labour Party...." ??!! ^{[citation needed]}, I think. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ghmyrtle, that was probably a response direct to Medeis, but it reads like a response to me. Could you please in future indent it one in from the post to which you're responding, and not one in from the last one in the current thread? It makes for very disjointed reading when you don't make it immediately clear to whom you're talking. Thanks. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 22:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC) [reply]

"The Nation" repeatedly reconfigures itself in relation to perceived or actual deficiencies. Consider, for example, the construction of appropriate German behaviour prior to 1914, prior to 1930, prior to 1945 and prior to 1989. One example to consider is the changes of meaning in "Australianness" in the past 130 years. Previous configurations of Australianness such as the Dutiful Daughter, the Authorised War Larrikin, New Australian-ness, or Multiculturalism come and go. Below them seethes changing ethnic and racial conceptions of the nation. In many cases competing concepts of nationalism contend. In the 1940s through the 1980s the Australian Communist Party championed a nationalist Australian identity, made from a gum leaf harmonica and Eureka stockade (without Lambing Flat riots)—meanwhile the Returned and Services League of Australia commemorated our valiant dead and their noble sacrifice beneath aging posters of Queen Victoria the Second. Very different nationalisms within a single "nation." Were the CPA anti-patriotic because they wanted President Larrikin instead of QEII? Fifelfoo (talk) 02:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who the hell is Queen Victoria the Second? 87.112.129.180 (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

a) Brainslippage; b) riffing off the RSL's very Australian-As-British worship of QEII. Fifelfoo (talk) 21:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

United States Population Growth By Region

How come there is much faster population growth in the Western U.S. (plus Texas) and in the Southeastern United States than in the rest of the United States? Not only is this happening right now, but this has consistently been the case since at least the Great Depression and WWII. Futurist110 (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I agree with your timing. It seems to me the decline of the rust belt is a consequence of the US moving from an industrial economy to a service economy, since most industry was in the North Central and North East. On the plus side, global warming may push people back up north, as the South becomes unbearable. StuRat (talk) 03:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another reason is that recent immigration to the US has been more from tropical areas than the traditional northern European nations, and people tend to move to where the weather is like home. StuRat (talk) 03:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article Sun Belt... -- AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Air conditioning. --Jayron32 04:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And insecticide. Neutrality^talk 04:22, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See also list of U.S. states by population growth rate, mean center of United States population, and Demographic history of the United States (the latter being a rather terrible article, unfortunately). Neutrality^talk 04:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to the Sun Belt, the U.S. population growth isn't purely divided along the Sun Belt lines. Utah, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and Colorado are above the Sun Belt, yet also grow much faster than the national average. Meanwhile Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Alabama are on the Sun Belt but are growing slower than the national average. As for my timing, it is based on facts, considering that most states in the North, Midwest, and "Interior South" (Southern states which don't border the Atlantic Ocean) experienced their peak number of Representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, or 1950s. Futurist110 (talk) 06:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Early on, that might be almost solely based on the growth of California, and to a lesser extent in the rest of the West. This was just because those territories were newly opened, by things like the transcontinental railroad, and it takes many decades for an area to reach it's equilibrium population after that. Then, as noted previously, there was movement away from the rust belt (due to deindustrialization) and into most of the South (due to affordable home A/C). The growth of the Hispanic population, mainly in the Southwest, also played a role. StuRat (talk) 19:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We should also consider the African American migrations which were primarily south to north until about 1970, afterward reversing: Great Migration (African American) (1910–1930), Second Great Migration (African American) (1941–1970) and New Great Migration. Rmhermen (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why couldn't the Rust Belt more efficiently transform into service/post-industrial economies, though? The Rust Belt still has a lot of room for its population to grow, even right now. The air conditioning thing makes sense, since this made living in the Southeast and Southwest much more tolerable. Also, you're right about the large decrease in European immigration (most of whom moved to the Rust Belt) and the large increase of Asian and Latino immigration (most of whom moved to the West and to a lesser extent to the Southeast). Futurist110 (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many service jobs are much lower paid than the manufacturing jobs they replaced. And, those that pay well often require years of education, so aren't a good option for somebody already in their 50's when the plant closes. StuRat (talk) 04:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urban legends or real?

Are these two stories [1] true?A8875 (talk) 03:02, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those stories are touching, but not particularly incredible, so I see no reason to doubt them. StuRat (talk) 03:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The bear story reminds me of one of the plots in Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain. —Tamfang (talk) 04:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article about Sadako Sasaki with links to several related articles. Fred Small also wrote a song about her.[2] 67.117.146.199 (talk) 05:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create a page for a sculptor

My grandfather is a sculptor in Cd. Juarez Mexico who has made several statues for the government in Juarez city, Chihuahua city, El Paso, TX even Chicago.

I'd like to document his work and his life as well as put pictures of his statues. How can I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.182.167.113 (talk) 03:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, read the guidelines to see if your grandfather is notable. If so, you can use WP:YFA or WP:RA to either create the article yourself or ask for someone else to create it. In either case, also read the policy about conflict of interest. In the future, you should ask this sort of question on the help desk at WP:HD RudolfRed (talk) 03:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Rudy, ever heard of "don't bite the newbies? Conflict of interest? Wow. μηδείς (talk) 03:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what is biting about my response. I pointed the OP to two resources useful for creating new pages. The OP is related to the subject of the proposed new article, which introduces the possibility of conflict of interest, so I pointed to the relevent page. RudolfRed (talk) 04:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, prospective editor. You'll need some sort of references, books or periodicals, that mention his work. So long as there are reliable sources that show he is notable you can create an article based on them. You will find doing so easier if you create an account for yourself. Once you have done this, search for his name as you would want it to appear in the Article, say John Q. Public. When you do so, unless we have an article on someone else with the same name, it will offer you the option of creating an article on him. Any instructions you need you will find here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents

The only real mistake would be to create an article without any published sources as references. (They can be published on line, but be related to something more than a blog.) If you don't have sources, someone is liable to nominate your work for deletion pretty quickly. If you have further questions, follow the help link I gave. Use the chat option if you want immediate help. This page is for research questions, so ask us if you need us to look something up for you. μηδείς (talk) 03:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, there are still some helpers in "the chat" who will point potential COI editors to the COI link before giving them any other advice. I am not one of those, because it would be tiring (about 95% of new entrants to the chat have a COI.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:22, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaly skating video, what is the music?

[3] Thanks. 67.117.146.199 (talk) 04:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Echo Nest says it's Georgopoulus, A. as Arp (2007) "Odyssey (For Bas Jan Ader)" on In Light (San Francisco: Smalltown Supersound), but that can't be right because the video was uploaded in 2006. 70.59.11.32 (talk) 10:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Presidents of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation

Are the Presidents of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation given any respect or acknowledgement anymore and were they ever in the past? It seems like they are largely forgotten. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They were all very famous at the time, but the presidents of the Congress of the Confederation had absolutely no executive power, and their duties to preside over the congressional assembly were almost always delegated, so they didn't really do anything. It was just a ceremonial role. The colonial speakers were the actual executives until the Constitution was ratified. 70.59.11.32 (talk) 09:23, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, the state governors, and the Congress itself, were the "actual executives" during the Articles of Confederation era. But yes, the president of Congress was not much more than a ceremonial position, a symbolic head of an increasingly unimportant body. No one really wanted the job, some guys turned it down, and my guess is few Americans at the time knew or cared who held the office. To the extent that some of the presidents were famous, they were famous for doing other things. —Kevin Myers 10:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We should mention that Congress did get around to creating some executive departments. The most important official in the government was not the president, but the Superintendent of Finance of the United States. —Kevin Myers 10:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Urbanization Data By State Before 1900 and in 2000-2010

Does anyone have it? Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 11:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.demographicchartbook.com/Chartbook/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=135&Itemid=142 - This page has pre-1900 and 2000 urbanization data, but I'm not sure what its source for the data is. Futurist110 (talk) 20:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another possible place to look is http://www.census.gov . They have a wealth of demographic data, directly from the US census. --Jayron32 19:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 06:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Riots in Belgium

How many riots in Belgium dealt with the ethnic minority? because you wikipedians didn't mentioned about a riot regarding the burqa ban. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.20.38 (talk) 19:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer to the question, but regarding your second sentence, Wikipedia is not the news, it is an encyclopedia. Looie496 (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BBC News is not an encyclopedia either, but still, that didn't mention Belgian riots any place I could see. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huffington Post mentioned the riots. That actually took me longer than I thought it would. Most of the sources mentioning the riots are blogs of one sort or another. Based on the description given, as well as the paucity of coverage, I am assuming this was more "a few dozen people angrily congregating in front of a police station" and less, you know, rioting. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you want to call it a riot... not every riot is notable. Essentially, if sources don't talk about an event (in some degree of depth), we shouldn't have an article about it. Blueboar (talk) 23:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Belgian newspaper Le Soir has had quite some coverage of this; for example: this story. However, I suspect that as such things go, it really wasn't that notable. Even the French Wikipedia has nothing on riots. Astronaut (talk) 10:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Mail covered it: [4]. It's their kind of story, though... --Tango (talk) 21:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's some minor riot in Belgium, most Western media outlets, other than those in Belgium, won't be interested in it, compared to all the other stories they get. Belgium media outlets, however, may have reported more on it. --Activism1234 00:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Think and Grow Rich and The Law of Success + The Law of Success In Sixteen Lessons by Napoleon Hill

Hello there, I have already purchased Napoleon Hill's "Think and Grow Rich" and start reading it and the book seems quite impressive to me. I have noticed there are two more books of this writer available in the store (The Law of Success and The Law of Success In Sixteen Lessons). I am thinking to purchase one of them. But I am bit confused about this two book whether they are similar to "Think and Grow Rich" book. If they are then I wouldn't go for them. Has anyone have own / read these books? What are the differences lays in them? Thanks in advance--180.234.114.129 (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has articles "Think and Grow Rich" and "The Law of Success".

—Wavelength (talk) 22:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Books that are popular, well-written, and successful, have a problem - the publisher will force the author to write more books on the same approximate topic, even if the original books covered the topic comprehensively. When deciding whether to buy the subsequent books, one thing you could consider is whether the original books lived up to their promise. Did you get rich? If so, then you will have no problem affording the new book or books. Did you not yet get rich? In that case, I would suggest that buying a possible re-hash of the book that failed to get you rich, is a bad idea. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dogbert has a word of warning here:[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend "The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better" (the Wikipedia article and the book of the same name).

—Wavelength (talk) 00:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" by Ayn Rand. μηδείς (talk) 16:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend "Investment Banking: Valuation, Leveraged Buyouts, and Mergers and Acquisitions." It will help get you started on the path to knowledge that will actually earn your money. It might inspire a career change and the taking of the Series 79 exam. 24.38.31.81 (talk) 13:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]