Humanities desk
< July 15	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 17 >

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.

July 16

Is Greece technically able to print Euros on its own?

Could Greece just print Euros if it went really mad?--Yppieyei (talk) 08:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That question was answered to the satisfaction it seems, of most, on the 7 July 2015 (UTC) (Sub-question by Medeis). --Askedonty (talk) 10:07, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Highways England Traffic Officer Service article

Is there a more general article which covers all such traffic officer services worldwide? 90.198.254.42 (talk) 10:20, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Highway patrol, perhaps? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

... although note that Highways Agency Traffic Officers are not police officers, but are employed by Highways England, the government agency that manages motorways and major A-roads in England. There may not be a direct equivalent in other countries. Gandalf61 (talk) 11:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is in Japan. See http://www.e-nexco.co.jp/english/business_activities/expressway_management/traffic_control_center.html. Traffic management patrols in Japan are employed by NEXCO which is the equivalent of Highways England and they're separate from police highway patrols. They deal with safety, minor incidents, traffic direction support in major incidents etc. 90.198.254.42 (talk) 12:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Search for a particular Canadian postage stamp image

I want to find an image of a particular Canadian postage stamp that I know used a landscape photo by one Harry Turner. I am pretty sure it was issued in the 2000's. I have tried Google searches and a Canadian postage stamp database. Can anybody think of another way of finding it?99.224.93.200 (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked around various databases and can't find it either. The only possibility is the 2009 International Year of Astronomy two-stamp set, which uses highly retouched photographs of a couple of observatories; only the designer is credited, but it's possible he worked from a photograph by Turner, since it seems to be his area of specialty. --Xuxl (talk) 11:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried writing to Canada Post? --174.88.133.35 (talk) 18:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't written to them (I'll have to buy a stamp), but I think I might have to.99.224.93.200 (talk) 00:55, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/archivianet/02011703_e.html contains details of every Canadian stamp issued from 1993 to 2010 with details of the creator and designer so it should be in there somewhere Lemon martini (talk) 22:48, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Picture of Dorian Gray and aestheticism

I know one major theme of the novel is aestheticism. But I am not entirely sure if the whole point of the novel is to critique the aesthetic movement or to tell a morality tale about what happens when you only pursue beautiful things at the cost of everything else. Is the author trying to say that aestheticism is somehow bad? Why didn't Dorian Gray think about moderation? Finding beauty in a theatre does not sound very bad, but I think he overdoes it by only thinking about beauty. If Dorian Gray (probably Anglican) converts to Roman Catholicism but his interest is merely superficial (i.e. reciting the rosary, attending the Mass, observing the lives of the saints), then would he have suffered the same fate? How was Roman Catholicism perceived by Anglicans in the Church of England during the 19th century? 66.213.29.17 (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article, which was the first link in this google search may help you. --Jayron 32 22:19, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've always thought that it should be The Portrait of Dorian Gray, since "portrait" works better for the double meaning of "painting" and "biography". Now, had the painting kept him healthy while sickness was shown in the painting, then The Perfect Picture of Health might have worked well as a title. StuRat (talk) 13:49, 18 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]

When asked to make some minor change to The Importance of Being Earnest, Oscar Wilde himself retorted "Who am I to tamper with a masterpiece?". I figure that what's good enough for the gander is more than good enough for the goose. :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Hilter and Wilhelm II

Could Hitler and Nazi leaders have sought asylum in a neutral nation after the end of the war much like Wilhelm II in the Netherlands or was the move to try them as war criminals much stronger in WWII?--2602:30A:C0A8:AC10:289F:BEBC:6382:F3C7 (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere in South America could have worked, as it did for some other Nazis. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:39, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Nakam worked very hard to make sure it didn't work. Of course, we don't speculate here, but Wilhelm II not having a genocide resting on his head makes it a bit of an apples and oranges situation anyways. --Jayron 32 00:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about the genocide thing? Rgds ✦ _hugarheimur 00:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To be entirely fair, 100,000 is a lot less than 6,000,000. See also whataboutism for why comparing the wrongdoings of one group does not diminish that of another. --Jayron 32 01:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: 6 millions that's just the Jews. Add to that about 11 million non-Jews Contact Basemetal here 01:40, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's whataboutery. Whataboutery would be "It's not fair to criticise Wilhelm - Hitler did it too!" (or vice versa). This was about the claim that genocide was the reason Hitler couldn't seek asylum while Wilhelm could. The fact that a genocide also occured under Wilhelm undermines that argument. (Speculation: the real difference is that Herero and Nama Genocide happend far away, to people "not like us" (and more specifically, not to the WWI victors), and so could be more easily ignored, while the Holocaust was not only larger, but directly affected the victors of WWII). 62.172.108.24 (talk) 08:31, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It did not. What affected them was that their press correspondents, commissars or chaplains, simple troopers where obliged to deal with the piles of toys, the piles of bones, the barbed wires, the stench etc., and that each of them and the future administrators of the occupied territories as well had to make with knowing that a number of the people all around the civilian population were accomplices of the crime, while a huge number of others were not knowingly involved at all. In fact, my opinion is that Wilhelm II just forgot to write Mein Kampf himself. --Askedonty (talk) 14:39, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The attempted annihilation of the Herero and Nama people did not take place in WWI so it seems to have absolutely nothing to do in this discussion. The whole world had continued to deal with Germany as if nothing had happened. You couldn't very well then turn around in 1918 and go "hey, look what I found under the carpet". Well, you could, but it would have sounded silly even to those who absolutely hated the Kaiser. Besides the attitude after WWI was just very different. No one attempted to bring to book those responsible for the various genocides perpetrated by the Turks (Armenian, Greek, Assyrian) either, for all that the victims were "people like us". (And those genocides did happen during WWI and were committed by the Turks, a German ally). Contact Basemetal here 17:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, I've read the US embassador account, full of distributing sweets to the children and gross war-time anti-German caricatures and readjusted sloppy clichés for describing the Turks. The fact that the Turks were allies with the Germans has nothing to do with it, the fact that the Armenians were favorable to the Czar and that they subscribed en-masse life insurances through family connections in the US does. --Askedonty (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) In any event there was a trial related to the Turkish war crimes in 1919, during the Occupation of Constantinople. --Askedonty (talk) 19:59, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The WP article states the only trials were trials by Turkish courts (court-martials). There was no international or Allied trial. Only a failed attempt in Malta. Contact Basemetal here 20:10, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They did not have legal background for it, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide dates from 1948, and some international arrangements require the existence of the UN. Note the use of the term "crime". The US in their communications with the Ottoman Empire in 1915-17 could only complain about "massacres", threatening retaliation and this, being later the word of the Allies the court-martial for the case was one of the conditions imposed upon Turkey, under the auspices of the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. --Askedonty (talk) 21:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me get this straight: you're saying that no one attempted to bring to book those responsible for the various genocides perpetrated by the Turks during WWI (Armenian, Greek, Assyrian) because "the Armenians were favorable to the Czar and they subscribed en-masse life insurances through family connections in the US". Correct? Contact Basemetal here 19:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I intended about the Ambassador's analysis regarding the detail of the relationships between the Germans and the Turks. Here about his negotiations with German Ambassador Wangenheim. --Askedonty (talk) 22:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear not everyone got what I was driving at (at least judging from the previous comment) which is: If we're only interested in answering the OP's question then Jayron was perfectly correct in stating that "Wilhelm II not having a genocide resting on his head makes it a bit of an apples and oranges situation". The anonymous user who brought up the German genocide of 1905 in South West Africa doesn't seem to understand the subtle difference between "has committed genocide" and "has a genocide resting on his head". The 1905 genocide is not one of the things Wilhelm II may have been called to answer for in 1918 and which most probably would only have had to do with events that had occurred in the context of WWI (though I'll wait for a definite answer from Alan to be absolutely positive on that point) and which, though they may have included "war crimes", did not include "genocide" as far as I am aware. Contact Basemetal here 19:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In 1918, the Dutch offered asylum to the Kaiser, because they thought (correctly) that having him out of the way would hasten a negotiated settlement and put an end to the slaughter. In WWII, the Allies were keen to avoid going down the same path of "we weren't defeated on the battlefield, we were stabbed in the back by Jews and socialists" excuse and were determined to fight the Germans to total military collapse, so Hitler fleeing the scene wouldn't have stopped the war. Alansplodge (talk) 10:12, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Warning - looking for a reference to support my assertion above, I have been unable to find anything. It seems that the decision was taken by Queen Wilhelmina on the phone. [1] There was a crisis in Anglo-Dutch relations when the Netherlands refused to extradite the Wilhelm for war crimes, much to the annoyance of David Lloyd-George whose election slogan in December 1918 was "Hang the Kaiser!". [2] Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Alansplodge (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And did those "war crimes" include the events of 1905 in South-West Africa? Contact Basemetal here 17:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lloyd-George believed that Wilhelm had been personally responsible for starting the whole war which was "a crime against humanity". (Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals by Gary Jonathan Bass (p. 369)). Alansplodge (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to the WP article on the Leipzig_War_Crimes_Trials which took place after WWI, only twelve people were tried for war crimes in those trials. So it would seem that there was a greater push to bring people to trial after WWII. Herbivore (talk) 18:38, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Might it not be relevant that Hitler's plan from the beginning was genocide? See Hilter's bio, Ich Krümme. μηδείς (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]