Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2017 June 19

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.

June 19

What determines whether an issue is "liberal" or "conservative"?

Veganism supporters are "liberals". Anti-abortion supporters are "conservatives". Vegans are against the killing of animals; anti-abortions supporters are against the killing of unborn children. Both claim to be defend innocent, helpless beings. Liberals are for the legalization of marijuana. Conservatives are for the legalization of e-cigarettes. What is a liberal? What is a conservative? 50.4.236.254 (talk) 02:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Conservatives are against killing baby because that's the way it's been since the days of Hippocrates and the Ten Commandments. Conservatives don't care about eating animals because the Bible doesn't care. Even Jesus ate animals. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Sagittarian Milky Way -- the traditional European view was that abortion before "quickening" (sometimes defined as the 40th day) was much less serious than abortion after quickening, and certainly not comparable to murder. In the United States, conservative Protestants didn't really join together with Catholics to make abortion a major political issue until around 1979.[1] -- AnonMoos (talk) 09:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't know that. The liberal view isn't "restrict non-incest/rape/birth defect/medical benefit abortions to c. 40 days" though. I'm not sure who's right, it's killing babies but it did help stop the crime wave in the 90s so is it worth it? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:14, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

To a significant degree, it also seems to be random. As an example, climate change is not a partisan issue in most of the world, and neither is the theory of evolution. Black emancipation and civil rights was a Republican topic from the US civil war to the Southern Strategy of the 1960s. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

In the civil rights thing the conservative politicians just switched parties and stopped being blatantly racist. The question is about liberals and conservatives, not Republicans and Democrats. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 07:11, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Stephan_Schulz -- in the United States of the 1850s, the real conservatives (the big business wing of the Whig party and such) opposed introducing controversies about slavery or divisive moralistic rhetoric into national (federal) politics in any form. The newly-formed Republican party was not exactly a radical party, but the majority of its members were resolved to vehemently oppose what they considered aggressive maneuvers by Southerners (and their sympathizers in the North) to expand the scope of slavery, so that few would have considered the Republican party conservative at that time... AnonMoos (talk) 09:36, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

There's a conceptual difference between "liberal" veganism and "conservative" anti-abortionism, if viewed from the "more freedom-less freedom" axis. "Conservative" antib-abortionism is about making laws to outlaw abortion, i.e. it is a restrictive ideology with the aim of restricting others' life choices. It's not the same as a personal choice not to undergo an abortion, which mainstream liberals are unlikely to have issues with. "Liberal" veganism is about a person's choice not to eat / use animal products, i.e. it is a personal restriction. Most, even vocal, veganists go as far as advocating the availability of non-animal-based choices for vegans, but there are few veganists who go further and advocate outlawing the consumption of animal products. Those few extremists who do are quite far from being mainstream "liberal". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:35, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

That falls apart if you change to different topics, such as gun control. Conservatives support gun control measures that let them choose if they want to own a gun or not. Liberals support gun control measures that ban anyone from owning a gun. An endless set of anecdotes may be used to support any view you like. In the end, it is just one group vs another group. The ideology of the two doesn't really make sense. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree that so-called "liberals" sometimes support more regulation and sometimes less, that's why US-style "conservative"/"liberal" are bad labels - it's very odd that "liberal" is used in the US to describe Socialists, when Socialism is decidedly anti-liberal in many respects. "Right" and "Left" are better, and modern political science is a lot more nuanced in analysing what kinds of positions are "Right" and what are "Left", I wouldn't say it "doesn't really make sense", it just doesn't make sense in one dimension.

On guns specifically, the fact that any mainstream political groups are pro-gun in the US is itself an oddity. In almost all other liberal democracies no sane part of the political spectrum would be pro-gun. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:06, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

• A few comments on this... First, an issue is neither "conservative" nor "liberal"... what can be conservative or liberal is the stance taken on the issue.

Second, stances can change over time, so a stance that was once liberal can become conservative (an example of this is support for non-regulated free trade... once a "liberal" stance, but now a "conservative" stance) or vise versa.

That said, essentially the difference is that conservatives want to maintain the status quo (or to return to a previous status quo) on any issue, while liberals want change. There is an old saying: "If you are not a liberal at age 18 you don't have a heart... and if you are not a conservative by age 40 you don't have a brain". Blueboar (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The labels are all screwed up, at least in contemporary America. "Big government" liberals should be in favor of the government telling people who can marry, how women should look after their health, and what services ISPs can restrict. "Fiscally responsible" conservatives are supposed to strive for balanced budgets and generally smaller national debt through means such as taxation. Neither is remotely close to the situation today.DOR (HK) (talk) 14:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

News flash: Politicians' words and deeds do not necessarily coincide. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:46, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, the political alignments in the US are currently in a state of flux... the popularity of both Trump and Sanders demonstrate that both parties are split between "mainstream" (relatively centrist) factions and more extreme populist factions. Who knows... we may even end up with a third party created out of the center leaning members of both parties (although third parties have usually not succeeded). The same thing is occurring (in a very different way) in the UK... support/opposition to Brexit is causing a realignment of which voters traditionally voted Tory vs Labour, and there seems to be an eagerness for someone in the center. Blueboar (talk) 17:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

We do have articles on these topics like conservatism for example. It is always a good idea to look at them first. They are different from left-wing politics and right-wing politics. liberalism is not quite on the same axis as conservatism, and I think it is better to talk about libertarianism instead rather than liberalism when combining it with conservatism, but individual freedom of thought as an actuality rather than as some mantra is rather inimical to conservatism. Dmcq (talk) 11:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

What's the woman/blindfold/bird/blood thing?

[2] What does it mean? Is it France-related? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

What makes you think it "means" anything? It's just a piece of artwork. I don't think it relates to anything in particular. --Viennese Waltz 07:39, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Agreeing with User:Viennese Waltz, this doesn't suggest anything from my fund of knowledge in the Arts & Letters. You might try:

• Conducting a reverse image search to get more information about the artist if this image has been used elsewhere
• Query the uploader of the linked content, e.g. with a comment, as to why this image was used. -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

(EC) I agree. AFAICT, this is a variant of the album artwork on Generation Nothing by Stereo Transmitted Disease [3] [4]. The album was released in 2011 but the art work associated with the album has been around since mid 2010 or earlier as per the links. It looks like the artwork both for the album and in that video was done by Adrian Knopik aka rarr112 aka RARRFC and may be called Hope [5] [6]. (At least my intepretation of that comment on DeviantArt is Adrian Knopik made the artwork for the album rather than this being their own re-intepretation of the album artwork.) Note that at least for me the Behance version shows in the cover for Illustrations but not in the gallery when I click on it. But it shows up in Pinterest and elsewhere e.g. [7] (I'm including this despite copyvio concerns). That version seems to have a signature on the arm, as well as the title at the upper left and seems to be the one generally used on Youtube.

As illustrated in the Deviantart comments, it seems to be very strongly associated with Mt Eden's dubstep Sierre Leone. Unfortunately the original version which I think is [8] is gone due to a copyright claim for Kewl Kid. But there are copies of it all over Youtube which often they have that artwork, the earliest one found was from 1 March 2010. (I'm not linking to it due to copyright concerns because. The mention of Dream Crusher Media recommending Mt Eden Official suggests to me it's likely Mt Eden would be earning royalties from this copy but it still has the Kewl Kid issue even if likely only relating to the artwork, see below.) While I can't be sure, that the image was in the original Mt Eden version (which was release in 2009 according to our article supported by [9]) especially since there are some other copies with different images, this comment [10]/[11] (and other stuff later) makes me think it was. I would expect the versions with different images could be related to Kewl Kid's copyright claim.

Definitely it has become strongly associated with Mt Eden's Sierra Leone as shown in the Deviantart discussion, this remix [12] (clearly a reinterpreation whether copyvio or not), this discussion about a tattoo on Reddit [13] (also this [14] to some extent) and the fact that new versions released by Mt Eden use a variant of that artwork [15] [16]. BTW the Reddit discussion suggests there used to be part of Fuse Collective which Adrian Knopik belong's to further confirming they or he did the artwork for Stereo Transmitted Disease.

Anyway the Dubstep via Sierra Leone connection is the likely explaination for why it's used in the video you linked to and some other dubsteps.

As to how Mt Eden came to use the artwork which I'm now fairly sure they did, the fact that Adrian Knopik makes no mention of Mt Eden or Sierra Leone but does STD (including the former mention on Fuse Collective) makes me think they just came across it somewhere whether in connection with STD or just on Adrian Knopik's work and used it, probably without permission. The Kewl Kid thing is also evidence in this regard as I'm pretty sure that refers to this studio [17] who I think did the album covers's commissioning Adrian Knopik or Fuse Collective for that specific image (or maybe all of it, not sure) [18]. It's also possible the artwork wasn't originally done for STD but instead they (also?) came across it and then got Kewl Kid to use it. There are other reinpretations e.g. [19] [20] who's signatures suggest other illustrates but I'm guessing these are also inspired by the Adrian Knopik work, probably after it took off in 2009. (One of them is dated 2010.)

P.S. I came across [21] who expressed scepticism but I wonder if he's just remembering wrong. 2009 is 3 years from 2012.

P.P.S. Supporting Deborahjay's comment but with the new info, if you want to know more I'd ask Mt Eden to confirm that they used in their 2009 video and got it from Adrian Knopik's work then ask STD about the meaning of artwork and depending on what they say, ask Adrian Knopik for more info on the meaning.

P.P.P.S. [22] shows another artwork with a hand associated with STD and Fuse Collective. The link suggests to me these are from the aforemention page on the Fuse Collective website which was I think http://www.fusecollective.com/#/stereo-transmitted-disease.

Nil Einne (talk) 09:45, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

[23] suggests the image has been missing from Illustrations on Behance since 2011 or earlier. It may make sense if STD or Kewl Kid didn't want it there to remove it. As per my earlier comment, it's possible the image on Behance predated it's use by STD and STD and or Kewl Kid just decided they wanted to use it and commissioned Adrian Knopik or Fuse Collective for its use and to make more versions. Someone here [24] says they asked Mt Eden who said they just Googled it (although not sure what they were actually Googling for that they came across it). Frankly if you're only interested in the meaning of the image, there's probably no use even asking Mt Eden IMO, stick with STD and Adrian Knopik. I'm not sure how likely you are to have success with STD. Their Facebook page seems to be gone [25] as is their website [26] and even MySpace page [27]. They do have a dead but still around Google Plus page [28] and I also came across at least one member's Facebook page which I'm intentionally not linking to which hasn't had any public posts for a while but I guess they could still be using it. As for Adrian Knopik's well there are the earlier links, and I also came across a Facebook page which again I won't link to which is active. Although this image seems famous enough I can't help thinking you may not be the first person to ask and he may be sick of such questions. Maybe if you step with indirect contacts like Fuse Collective there could be someone who will filter it if they know Adrian Knopik has no interest. Oh and I forgot I came across [29] which is from April 2010 with a different artwork making me wonder if it was between then and July that the new artwork became available. However [30] and [31] and probably [32] make me think the band existed in some form since 2008 or 2009. Oh and [33] seems to further suggest some variant of the artwork was used in the original Mt Eden version although I'm not sure if this is a different person from the Reddit. Nil Einne (talk) 11:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, that is a very thorough answer. After I saw this weird creative thing several times (without remembering where) I wondered if it's political or pacifist or from a film or album cover or some guy who makes anachronistic propaganda posters of very old things or is memorializing the victims of an event or what? But I suppose if it's so hard to find out where it came from then it it's mostly just known for electronic music and some album covers. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Coin with cave painting

I remember coins with cave art, like those figures throwing spears at animals. I think they were Canadian quarters, or they may have been Euros. I've been looking for them to show a friend, but no luck. Anyone? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:03, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

There is a Spanish 2 EUR coin (Euro coins have a common and a "national" side) based on the Altamira cave paintings, see [34]. Many of the national sides are short term commemorative releases, so this may not be easy to find in general circulation, but it should be easy to get from a coin dealer (at a premium, but not outrageous - I've see it for EUR 3.35, which means that p&p may dominate cost of acquisition). I also don't find the image easy to recognize ;-). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Google is blocked where I am. But, I found the spanish coin. That's not it. That is what kept showing up in searches. I'm sure it was like stick figures throwing spears, that sort of thing. Odd. This is driving me nuts! :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This Mexican 100 peso coin has an image from a cave painting, although nobody is throwing any spears as far as I can see. Alansplodge (talk) 10:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

No spears, but maybe this? Matt Deres (talk) 13:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

That's the Canadian one, the February 1999 quarter. (If you can't get the linked page, it should come up if you use "petroglyph" in your search terms. The image is from Writing on Stone Provincial Park in Alberta.)

Apparently there is also cave art on a Mongolian tögrög coin. Wikipedia won't let me show you the link, sorry. Search string "mongolian coin cave tugrik" should find it. 70.67.222.124 (talk) 15:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I see what you mean, try 2008 Mongolia gold 500 Tugrik (Cave Painting) for a tiny image. Alansplodge (talk) 16:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I'd be rather surprised if the French never made a coin to commemorate Lascaux. StuRat (talk) 17:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Matt Deres, I think you found it! I remember spears, but it was so long ago. Thank you so, so much! :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Compass-point orientation of churches

The local Roman Catholic church, which is larger than most, has its altar at the west end. Is this normal for Catholic churches? 86.176.19.17 (talk) 09:45, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Our article Orientation of churches says that most early Catholic churches had the altar at the east end, because it was traditional for early Christians to pray facing east, but says "The importance attached to orientation of churches declined after the 15th century." Our article Ad orientem explains more about the history of this orientation. CodeTalker (talk) 22:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

My college humanities prof referred to churches with their altar in the west as "apse backward." Edison (talk) 03:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Like the Pope's church, St. Peters? What's up with that? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:58, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

I see the heading of this section has been changed. The original meaning of the word "orientation" was, of course, "turning towards the east". 94.195.147.35 (talk) 08:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Chinese economic reform and urbanization

Hi there, I have been reading literature on the matter and haven't been able to understand this issue so I would be grateful if somebody could provide assistance. I have been reading the article Chinese economic reform which is a lot easier to understand than much of research on the area however what I would like to know is how it has resulted in the process of urbanisation. I am not an academic so a short, pithy response would suffice if anybody is able to provide one? Thanks very much. 2A02:C7D:146:C400:3861:547C:DB91:A744 (talk) 17:40, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The Chinese economic reform has been focused on industrialization, in cities. Agricultural, rural areas largely remain undeveloped. Thus, in order to have a better standard of living, people must migrate to the cities. This is in no way unique to China, however, and industrialization has led to urbanization since the start of the Industrial Revolution. StuRat (talk) 19:40, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

One of my favourite takes on this topic is the series of short documentaries and sketches that the BBC did at White Horse Village (some videos here). The way the place transformed from a rural village into a completely unrecognisable suburb is astounding - even the landscape completely changed, and the personal stories of the people caught up in the process are revealing. If you can access the videos, I strongly encourage watching it. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

In addition to StuRat's admirable contribution, there is also an administrative component to China's urbanization. Local governments often add areas to cities so that the land can be reclassified, for profitable (to the local government) redevelopment. That has added millions of people to the "urban" designation, without those folks having to go to the trouble of actually moving. Rather, the city came to them!DOR (HK) (talk) 00:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Death Penalty In 1930s, For Out of State Resident?

Hello, I'm writing a story, taking place in Florida in the 1930s, that involves the death penalty for the protagonist. However, as of now, my draft has him living in South Carolina, but being arrested for a murder in Florida. I do have within the text that the local police are, essentially, looking for an excuse to execute him. However, legally, would this be a possibility? Thank you! 68.58.222.122 (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the laws where the crime occurred apply, not the laws of other states. The only issue with another state is if they must be extradited from a state without the death penalty, they might refuse. StuRat (talk) 18:00, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

According to Extradition Clause, they can't refuse. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:13, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

According to that article, the governor could not be compelled to do so until a 1987 ruling, after the time period in question. StuRat (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The 1861 case appears to have been a noble attempt to thwart those trying to get fleeing slaves back. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Yep, and it remained in force until 1987, allowing governors to refuse extradition, although with the caveat that had there been a particularly egregious case before this, it might well have found it's way to the US Supreme Court earlier, and resulted in the ruling being reversed sooner than it was. StuRat (talk) 20:08, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

It would be interesting to see if a governor actually refused to return an accused murderer to the state where it happened. Willingness to harbor a killer wouldn't likely set very well among the electorate. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Picture a case of someone who was a kid in a group that committed a murder, and is considered to be guilty even though he didn't pull the trigger, but now 50 years has passed and he has been an exemplary citizen in his new state ever since, and now his true identity has been revealed. StuRat (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

As with bomb-throwers in the late 60s / early 70s. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

The case is a bit more nuanced than this -- the constitutional language only applies to people charged in states, of which Puerto Rico is not one. There was an Extradition Act which extended to Puerto Rico. However, the question then is whether a mere law can force the Governor of a State to hand over one of his citizens to be tried in a Territory, which would seem to be infringing on the State's self-governance, 9th and 10th amendment etc. Our article quotes Scalia as saying "no party before us has asserted the lack of power of Congress to require extradition from a State to a Territory." -- he and some others did not join the decision, and now I wonder if that was a hint of his willingness to vote against the demand if the state had made that argument? Wnt (talk) 19:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Izzy Einstein's autobiography

Does anyone know if this book, Prohibition Agent No 1, is available either electronically or for purchase for < $500? I'm astonished that such a relatively recent book should prove so elusive... Amisom (talk) 20:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I would not call it recent... it was published back in the 1930s, and has been out of print for quite a while. Unlikely that there is an electronic edition. I think your best bet would be to ask at a large public library. Blueboar (talk) 01:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

I guess recent in the sense of not like 200 years old (and lots of books from that period are cheaply available!) Amisom (talk) 07:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

The availability and cost of a book is driven by supply and demand.... as long as a book is in demand, new editions will be printed... supply will be strong, and the availability of supply will keep the cost down. If there is no longer a demand, new editions will not be printed... the existing supply will dwindle (as existing books are lost or become damaged)... availability shrinks, and (for those who are looking for one of the surviving copies) the cost will rise. Blueboar (talk) 15:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

You can try Interlibrary loan to (temporarily) get a copy. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Austrian politics

What's the explanation for the sudden turn in the voting intention, as described in Opinion_polling_for_the_Austrian_legislative_election,_2017. Around 2017 April, the ÖVP started to grow and grow. --Hofhof (talk) 22:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The obvious reason would be a reaction to European terrorism from ISIL and immigration from the Middle East, as a result of the current wars there in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, etc. Supporting the native religion is a predictable response to a perceived threat from outside religions. Note that the chart seems to show them drawing support away from all other parties. See Austrian People's Party (their English name). Note that this is just a recent uptick in an overall downward trend, with their National Council of Austria vote percentage dropping from 49.8% to 24% since 1945. StuRat (talk) 00:43, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Most of the increase came after the resignation on 10 May of Reinhold Mitterlehner as chairman of the ÖVP and the take-over by the young and popular foreign minister Sebastian Kurz. Shortly afterwards the date for the next (snap) elections were announced. One of Kurz's conditions for accepting the chairmanship was that the ÖVP's campaign was to be very much focused on him. All this happened in the wake of the election of Emmanuel Macron in France, so I think the ÖVP's current success has very much to do with the person of Sebastian Kurz and a perceived duel with chancellor Christian Kern. After some ten years of grand coalition government (SPÖ/ÖVP), this finally signals some movement in the centre of Austrian politics. The upturn seems to have started a little earlier, though, which I can't fully explain. Some fairly harsh statements by interior minister Sobotka may have contributed, to the detriment of the right-wing FPÖ, usually the go-to party for Austrians worried by migration or anything else. --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)