Humanities desk
< December 12	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 14 >

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

December 13

Is dutch east indies involved in world war 1

Well, only india then british colonies can fought wars in 1914 to 1918. then why there is no section for dutch east indies? Allies_of_World_War_I#Non-state_combatants in this page only mentions the word netherlands once Asian_and_Pacific_theatre_of_World_War_I#Gallery ow man, what happened to the dutch colony east indies? then the fate is unknown. Indian_Army_during_World_War_I Oh no! only india can provide the article. then India ignored Dutch east indies! India wins! Indonesia Lost!2404:8000:1005:555:C0EE:F0EE:B396:6DF3 (talk) 06:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC) they can only provide indian army not dutch east indies army[reply]

A short glance at the map at the top of the first article you linked would have told you that the Dutch East Indies, along with their coloniser, where neutral during World War 1. That doesn't mean they were unaffected, that doesn't mean that public opinion didn't choose sides, but they tried very hard not to get involved. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Netherlands Indies and the Great War: 1914-1918 has some details. Initially it was thought that Japan might invade, so a militia was recruited. As the war went on, the loss of trade resulted in severe economic hardship. The colonial government gave concessions to the independence movements to keep them onside, and there was greater autonomy due to the difficulty of communication with the Netherlands. However, the status quo was restored after the war. Alansplodge (talk) 09:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Diversity training and DEI outside the United States?

Nowadays in the United States, companies have spent billion on diversity training for their employees while most colleges and universities have sizable bureaucracy dedicated to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). Do other countries especially those in the West also have diversity training and DEI? StellarHalo (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@StellarHalo DEI phrasing is quite US specific phrasing, but even so due to US multinational companies expanding, the concepts are 'exported' to other countries. For example see [1]. But in general, different countries have different legal/social practices. This article lists 120 diversity in tech initiatives which is undoubtedly US influences, but also has a trickle down effect/own histories [2] ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:27, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Diversity and Inclusion Training" is the name commonly used in Canada, and it's quite common, both in the public and private sector. It often places particular importance on issues related to First Nations and other indigenous Canadians, as these are very salient here. See here: [3]. Xuxl (talk) 13:06, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Russia vs Ukraine

Ok I'm new at this so please don't bring on any ultra contentious political issues that I'm clueless about. There is saber rattling in the news about Russia possibly getting ready to invade Ukraine. Let's ignore all the moral and military issues, international reaction and all that, and assume that the invasion, if launched, will be successful. That leaves the question: why would Putin *want* to invade Ukraine? What would he do with it once he has it? It sounds almost like California invading Oregon. Oregon surrenders, but then what? :: It doesn't seem like much of a gain, given the increased hassle of governing the bigger combined territory. Are there important resources or anything like that? Thanks. 2602:24A:DE47:B8E0:1B43:29FD:A863:33CA (talk) 07:49, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Forget even Russia and Ukraine. Take any combination of 2 big states/ alliances and a buffer state in between. For convenience we will consider A and C are big powers and b is in between buffer state.

A and C both tend to benefit in having a buffer state in between by having to spend less on standing forces right at the border.

Problem starts with mutual distrust between big forces, if they start feeling that other adversary might capture buffer state.

Adversary capturing buffers state has two likely costs

a) Buffer ends and any ways you shall need to spend more on standing force to defend yourself.

b) Doing war at your own border has more direct bearing than doing war on some one else's territory.

So big powers will always try buffer really remains buffer but if buffer itself tries to compromise and do military favoritism to either of one big power the other power will obviously feel threatened and take steps to capture buffer.

If win is assured managing territory remains a lesser immediate concern, (though over powering buffer state can cost high like Afghanistan, at times of actual managing the territory) But in times of mutual distrust immediate concerns and benefits get more weightage than long term implications. IMHO

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 09:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So rather like the Prisoner's dilemma, in that both sides are encouraged to do something that makes things worse for everyone, because if they don't but the other does, they will be even worse off. Iapetus (talk) 10:04, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, almost. Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 10:52, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a New York Times podcast (with transcript) about why Putin might want to invade Ukraine. Card Zero (talk) 09:32, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, there are a couple of things going on here.

1) The biggest issue right now is Ukraine's potential membership in NATO. Russia considers Ukraine joining NATO to be an existential threat, and will do anything pre-emptively to stop that. The previous former states in the Russian sphere of influence to join NATO were Poland and the Baltic States, and Russia does not intend to cede any more ground in that regard. It seeks to maintain buffer states such as Ukraine and Belarus and prevent any further expansion of NATO along its borders. See, for example, here.

2) Since 2014, Russia has seen increasing Western encroachment into Ukraine as a major threat, even beyond the NATO overtures. That year, pro-Russian Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych was ousted, which Russia blamed on the West, and that was the main precipitating event in the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Crimea, which has been populated by a majority ethnic Russians, was only ceded to Ukraine during the Soviet era, though Russia was happy to let Ukraine keep it so long as there was a Russian-friendly leadership in the country. The annexation of Crimea and the related War in Donbas (another region with a large ethnically Russian population inside of Ukraine) are part of this issue. There's a belief that Putin seeks to annex Donbas, and also annex a corridor between all of these territories along the Black Sea. Russian access to the Black Sea is also something of an existential issue for Russia, going back well earlier than the Soviet days. Russia's historic lack of a warm-water port was seen as its major weakness in the years following its independence from Mongol suzerainty, and it spent most of the early centuries of its history expanding its empire southwards. The area along the Black Sea was annexed in 1783. From then on, Sevastapol was Russia's most important warm-water port, and it fought vehemently to hold on to it. The disastrous Crimean War shows just how valuable Russia has always held this area. See here or here for information regarding Russia seeking a land corridor to Crimea.

--Jayron 32 12:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. Jayron32's answer in particular was very enlightening. 2602:24A:DE47:B8E0:1B43:29FD:A863:33CA (talk) 03:36, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Ukraine to NATO would drastically change the current situation, where among NATO members, only two of the small and vulnerable Baltic states (whose annexation by the Soviet Union was never recognized by the U.S. from 1939-1990 -- see Kersten Committee etc), have direct shared borders with the main area of Russia below the arctic circle. (Poland and the third Baltic state have borders with the Kaliningrad enclave, and Norway has a short border with Russia in a remote arctic region, as does the U.S. if you count the ice between Little Diomede island and Big Diomede island.) Vladmir Putin lies about many things, but his worries that if Ukraine joined NATO, then the length of the non-Kaliningrad non-arctic borders between NATO countries and Russia would increase dramatically, are 100% factual... AnonMoos (talk) 20:20, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking up a German court case

Hi, I was wondering if anybody know how to lookup a German court case. I've not been able to make any headway against it at at. The number is Case 8K 5055/94 under judge Kohlheim. It is regarding the diplomat Rudolf von Scheliha on whether he took payments for delivering reports to Soviet intelligence. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 12:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to This, German court records are not normally made public. --Jayron 32 12:17, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

German law does not have a stare decisis principle in the same way that legal systems derived from the English Common Law do, so there hasn't been the same incentive to make court records public... AnonMoos (talk) 15:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I read that. What I'm really looking for I guess, whether the court case actually exists. That woud help a bit. I did a search, but couln't see much. scope_creep^Talk 15:29, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are looking for a case at the Nazi Reichskriegsgericht from 1942, right? Its (fragmentary) archival materials are handled by the Bundesarchiv; there's a page about them here. It mentions that it has some material relating to the "Red Orchestra" trials, if that helps you. I couldn't access the online inventory ("Findbuch") right now, but you might want to give a try later. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or if this refers to the 1995 verdict by the Verwaltungsgericht Köln (Cologne administrative court, judge’s name presumably Jürgen Kohlheim) which is mentioned in de:Rudolf von Scheliha: maybe put in a request at nrwe@olg-koeln.nrw.de (some verdicts are published at NRWE, but I couldn’t find this particular one). Cheers ❖_hugarheimur 16:49, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I never thought of looking at the de article, weirdly. That's a good angle. I'll check that out. scope_creep^Talk 18:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The De article is completely non-specific but I have forwarded an email. Thanks folks. See what happens and I will keep you updated. scope_creep^Talk 19:06, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They have come back, the procedural care unit. They have posted the request directly to the Cologne Administrative Court and as its a research request no charge will be made. See what happen's now. scope_creep^Talk 14:57, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Future Perfect at Sunrise: I've not looked at it yet, but it might be handy to flesh out some last minute details. scope_creep^Talk 15:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paradox name

A stranger comes up to me in a shopping mall and says "Never accept unsolicited advice from strangers", then walks away.

I'm a reasonable man and this sounds like good advice. But I quickly discover I cannot accept his advice without rejecting it, and I cannot reject his advice without accepting it. My life is now at an end, consumed in an endless vortex of impossibilities.

Is there a name for this paradox? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JackofOz It sounds like a logic related paradox, e.g. liar paradox? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:33, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's very close to the liar paradox. But there's a way out of Jack's paradox; namely, Jack can reject this particular stranger's advice by sometimes accepting unsolicited advice from strangers, just not in this particular instance.

That's also a loophole in some versions of the Liar, in particular Paul's:

One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This witness is true.
— Paul, Titus 1:12

We can resolve the paradox by stipulating that some Cretians are liars, in particular this one of themselves, but that they are not alway liars. --Trovatore (talk) 21:45, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First time I've encountered the American legal sense of "stipulate" in the wild. I would have been baffled if I had not met it in the works of Robert A. Heinlein. I have just tagged that sense as US in Wiktionary--ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about Cretans? Or truthiful, Trump-supporting Cretins? Clarityfiend (talk) 05:18, 14 December 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Cretian is the spelling in the KJV. Though I haven't checked whether it's alway spelled that way. --Trovatore (talk) 17:20, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You could yell back at him, "Always remember to never say 'always' or 'never'!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:43, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Epimenides paradox, see also: Self-refuting idea. --2603:6081:1C00:1187:9426:C089:AB21:5AB2 (talk) 21:47, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Raymond Smullyan wrote several books about these puzzles, fwiw: see Raymond_Smullyan#Logic_problems. 2602:24A:DE47:B8E0:1B43:29FD:A863:33CA (talk) 18:32, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Catch-22. Omidinist (talk) 02:10, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]