Humanities desk
< April 25	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 27 >

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.

April 26

Maps of the Spring and Autumn Period

Are there any maps depicting the mosaic states found during the start of the Spring and Autumn Period, i.e. when hundreds of states were coexisting before the consolidations during 7th and 6th century BC?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:56, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This one is dated 827-782 BC. --Jayron 32 10:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On what charges was she executed?

The article of Clara Petacci state that she was executed rather than murdered (it also has the execution-category), but it does not state on what charges she was executed. For which crime was she executed? Thank you!--Aciram (talk) 20:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the midst of a revolution, the difference between an execution and a murder isn't so clear. These were what is often called summary executions. That is, while there was a consensus that they should be killed among whatever provisional government was in place on that day, there was no formal trial. StuRat (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't already seen it there is some info here Death of Benito Mussolini. I couldn't find the specific answer to your question though so hopefully another editor will be able to post them here. MarnetteD|Talk 20:36, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From a brief glance at that article, it doesn't appear there were any formal charges for anyone, including Mussolini. Someone tell me if I misread it. --Trovatore (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Petacci is pretty bare-bones. There's a much more extensive article on her in Italian, it:Clara Petacci. It reports that she and Mussolini were "assassinated" by partisans, "in spite of the fact that there was no pending sentence for Petacci" (what, was Mussolini sentenced in absentia or something? I had never heard that). Apparently some claim that she tried to protect Mussolini from the partisans with her body and was shot for that. That sounds a little bit "opera" but who knows.

It sounds like she wasn't purely a love-stricken innocent extraneous to all the proceedings, though: She apparently wrote a letter to Mussolini urging him to execute Galeazzo Ciano. But I doubt the partisans knew about that, or cared if they did; Ciano was probably not high on their list of concerns. --Trovatore (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting contrast is that Mussolini's wife, Rachele Mussolini, was also captured by Italian partisans during the same time frame, in about the same place, yet was not executed, and lived to be 89, despite having fully supported her husband's actions. Was this because wives were treated differently than mistresses, in that time frame, in Italy ? StuRat (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WAG alert: It's more likely that the reason is that she was caught separately and away from her husband. Petacci was probably just the victim of spillover rage against Il Duce. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wives and girlfriends alert? Nice double entendre! --Trovatore (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC) [reply]

The Italian article seems to treat the partisans quite harshly. The relevant paragraph says

Il giorno seguente, 28 aprile, dopo il trasferimento a Bonzanigo di Mezzegra, sul lago di Como, Mussolini e la Petacci furono assassinati dai partigiani tramite fucilazione, secondo la versione diffusa a Giulino di Mezzegra, sebbene su Clara non pendesse alcuna condanna. La versione ufficiale, e anche alcune versioni alternative, affermano che venne uccisa perché si oppose all'esecuzione di Mussolini, frapponendosi tra il Duce e gli assassini , ma soprattutto per sadismo (come testimoniano le sevizie sessuali commesse dai partigiani sul suo corpo dopo l'assassinio) e per eliminare una testimone scomoda.

Basically it's saying that she tried to keep Mussolini from being shot, and they shot her for that, but also for sadistic sexual motives, and to eliminate a witness. And that they did sexual things to her body after she as dead. There is a reference, to a Professor Pierluigi Baima Bollone, about whom I have no other information beyond a Google search. I would be interested to know how well-established these claims are. --Trovatore (talk) 22:20, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the sexual stuff may be nonsense. It was added in this diff last October, without changing the cite. There is a complaint on the talk page about how the book doesn't say that. Google Books won't let me see the key paragraph, so I can't quite tell, but in any case the claim is suspect. I'm going to remove it from the Italian article. --Trovatore (talk) 08:07, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Despots sometimes get back what they gave, as it were. The Romanian guy and his wife are another example. Qadaffi is another one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Elena Ceaușescu can hardly have been surprised that she would share her husband's fate. She certainly shared all his fame. Per our article, she was deputy prime minister, had a personality cult, got a PhD in chemistry based on work that was almost certainly done by others and which she probably didn't understand. Petacci doesn't seem quite comparable (even if one historian described her as having "Nazi rigor", she doesn't seem to have been publicly involved the way that EC was). --Trovatore (talk) 23:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, that whole family was a nasty bit of work. StuRat (talk) 23:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I read in one book that Clara wanted to die with Mussolini and that when encouraged to back off during his shooting, she instead chose to stand alongside him and was ultimately shot too. This says that "according to Mario Cervi, a revolutionary committee, made up of Leo Valiani, Luigi Longo..., Sandro Pertini and Emilio Sereni" ordered only Mussolini's execution, not Clara's. Brandmeister^talk 11:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Passing a bill vs. implementing a bill (US)

While trying to wrap my head around the US healthcare bill, MACRA, I noticed that it passed in 2015, but that the details on its implementation (how doctors would actually be reimbursed) weren't released until well over a year later – after much deliberation. Now I'm trying to wrap my head around THAT, (little embarrassed I didn't know how this is how things worked).

I'm not even sure about the basic terminology for this process. Is it a common political tactic in the US to push a vague bill through, and then fill in more polarizing details later? Are there any good articles on this? Any help would be great – thanks!

AlfonseStompanato (talk) 22:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a common political tactic in the US to push a vague bill through, and then fill in more polarizing details later? Yup, except the "filling in" is done not by Congress, but by agencies of the executive branch. Congress basically passes a law saying, "We want X. Agencies A, B, and C are hereby tasked with implementing and overseeing the effort to do X." Here's a good summary from CrashCourse U.S. Government and Politics. Some relevant articles: Primary and secondary legislation, Rulemaking, Administrative law, United States administrative law. --47.138.161.183 (talk) 23:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It also happens with with laws requiring states to do work. For example (staying in the health care field), each state implements Medicare. Federal Congress passes a law stating that all Medicare programs must do X. They don't tell the states how to do X or how to pay for X. They just say that every state must do it. MACRA is a Medicare reimbursement law aimed at shrinking the number of organizations providing health care for Medicare patients. Every year, they will take a very substantial amount of money away from the worst organizations and give it to the best organizations (they get to define what "worst" and "best" means). The worst ones suffer financially and get bought out by the best ones until there are just a couple very large health organizations left in the nation. Of course, this is all centered on Medicare and only Medicare. Only about 15% of patients are on Medicare (but most of fraudulent claims are through Medicare - so those criminals will likely suffer). 209.149.113.5 (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

celebrity endorsements on politicians

I notice that in US, celebrities regardless they are actors, actresses, singers, and musicians endorses any candidates who is running for the presidential nomination of a political party like Danny DeVito endorsed Bernie Sanders to be the Democratic nominee but in France, I see that the candidates of the presidential election don't get endorsements from celebrities. Why? Is it against the law of election that a celebrity endorsing a politician running for presidency? Donmust90 (talk) 23:39, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Donmust90Donmust90 (talk) 23:39, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There were all kinds of celebrity endorsements of presidential candidates in 2016. For example, Scott Baio and Ted Nugent supported Trump. And they go way back. Sammy Davis Jr. supported Nixon (don't ask why). Babe Ruth supported Al Smith. It's very common. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misread the Q. It's why celebrities don't endorse politicians in other nations. One possibility is that they fear government retribution. Not sure about France, but in Russia if you fall afoul of the ruling elite, you may be arrested on trumped up charges, or even killed. Auditing taxes might be a less drastic way to harass anyone the government doesn't like. StuRat (talk) 00:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, you're right. In any case, here's an article about some celebrity endorsements in the French campaign.[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have a law against it in Canada, which doesn't exactly work. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothesis: For each country, celebrity endorsements reflect the nature and relative significance of such celebrities (e.g. performance arts) in a nation's culture. Compare the media coverage before vs during presidential election campaigns. Consider that this might indicate USA interest in celebrities per se and the political content is secondary. For a European example, prior to the Dec. 4, 2016 Austrian presidential elections, Conchita Wurst encouraged voters to support inclusive and liberal values, with the candidate's name mentioned only at the end. -- Deborahjay (talk) 05:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they do, but you don't know enough French celebrities or read the French-speaking media to identify any. This is just an assumption on my part. No offence intended regarding your level of knowledge on French celebrities or language! Bear in mind though that both U.S. politics and celebrities are followed by the whole world, which explains why so many people worldwide may know, for example, that Ellen DeGeneres is a big Obama fan, that Kelsey Grammer is a Republican, just by being a fan of these celebrities, whether or not they follow U.S. politics. In the UK, celebrities can and do support various politicians. Here are some I recall (which may have changed!): Sean Connery supports the SNP, Carol Vorderman supports the Conservatives, Daniel Radcliffe supports the Liberal Democrats, Patrick Stewart is a Labour supporter, and so is Lily Allen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.23.25.64 (talk) 08:46, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From a Greek perspective, it is more likely for the celebrity himself/herself to get directly involved in politics.

Mikis Theodorakis, the famous composer, was a symbol of persecuted leftists for several decades and many of his musical works were political in nature. He was elected MP several times (1981-1986, 1989-1993), and served as a government minister from 1990-1992. He is considered rather controversial for switching parties. In the 1980s, he was an MP for the Communist Party of Greece, while in the 1990s he became an MP and minister for New Democracy (a liberal-conservative party that has served as the major force of the right-wing since the 1970s).
Melina Mercouri, the famous actress, was known during the Greek junta for her political activism. She then became a politician for PASOK (the Socialist party, representing the center-left), got elected MP several times, and served as a government minister from 1981 to 1989, and from 1993 to her death in 1994.
Thanos Mikroutsikos, the famous composer and song-writer, was known for his political activism and his support of Maoism in the 1970s. He joined PASOK in the 1990s, served as a deputy government minister from 1993 to 1994, and as government minister from 1994 to 1996.
Liana Kanelli, a famous TV journalist known for her polemic style while speaking, became a politician for the Communist Party of Greece in the 2000s. She keeps getting elected MP non-stop since 2000. She is considered something of a public face for the party, though she is the only openly religious MP in a party mostly composed of atheists.
Kostas Karras, a famous actor who was in the spotlight from the 1960s to the 1990s, became a politician for New Democracy in the 2000s. He was elected MP from 2000 to 2007.

There are several other actors, musicians, sportspeople, journalists, and writers who got elected or were political candidates, but these are the most notable I could remember. I am not certain whether former MP Georgios Karatzaferis counts as a celebrity. He is a former advertising executive, who has served as a journalist, media owner, and book writer. But he is much more famous as a politician. (Though to be honest, his ideas are not all that original. Jews/Israel are behind every major disaster (including 9/11), there was no Holocaust, Auschwitz and Dachau are myths, etc. Just the kind of crap your average right-winger keeps parroting. ) Dimadick (talk) 09:19, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, MANY American celebrities also run for office, i.e. Ronald Reagan, Bill Bradley, Al Franken, Jack Kemp, Jesse Ventura, etc. --Jayron 32 11:07, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Before Tony Halme was a Finnish MP, he was part of "The Foreign Fanatics", who battled "The All Americans". In that spirit, I'll namedrop Antonio Inoki, The Great Sasuke, Ken Dryden and Nikolai Volkoff (he ran in a Maryland district, and lost, but still counts). InedibleHulk (talk) 11:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In Canada there was also Lionel Conacher and Red Kelly for hockey player politicians. And I suppose Kevin O'Leary counts as a celebrity if not a politician... Adam Bishop (talk) 17:23, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To not leave Canada shorthanded, I'll note Jean Lapointe and team captain Justin Trudeau, born famous for being famous. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding France, the OP's premise is wrong. A number of celebrities endorse candidates. See here [2], although it's fewer than elsewhere. [3]. The second article claims that a growing cynicism regarding political practices in France is likely to blame. --Xuxl (talk) 12:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why would anyone think that the ability to entertain in some way, makes one a good judge of politicians? In the UK there is a tendency to think that endorsements trivialise both the entertainer and the politician. Pincrete (talk) 12:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]