Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 March 31

= March 31 =

Aryan vs. Japanese racial superiority
Hitler and the Nazis claimed racial superiority. Everyone else was supposedly racially inferior. Why would the Japanese, who also claimed racial superiority, choose to fight on the side of a dictator who thought they were a mongrel race? Why would the Italians? They're not exactly blond haired and blue eyed either. Wouldn't Japan and Germany eventually have to face off against one another? Was this point exploited by Allied propaganda? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammeg01 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * See Honorary Aryan. Woogee (talk) 02:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Justification and true reasons can be different, you know. Just because they justified their actions by claiming racial superiority, it doesn't mean that they actually believed it. People usually only make bold claims ('Aryan blood is pure blood! All else is inferior!') when the veracity of those claims is dubious to begin with. See Big Lie. Vranak (talk) 03:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wartime makes for peculiar alliances. Such as the partnership with Joe Stalin's USSR. Right after the war, they became the enemy and Germany and Japan became essentially allies (the situation parodied in 1984.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * One should realize that slogans for the unwashed masses are but a pale second to expediency and politics, and always remember the old sayings: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" and "war and politics make strange bedfellows". Flamarande (talk) 13:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. We fought two wars against the British, yet here we are allied with them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:59, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Germany too...
 * For further info on that point, listen to Tom Lehrer's song "MLF Lullaby" (a proposal which, perhaps thankfully, was never realized). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Our Dumb Century noticed this and unearthed for us all a fake front-page news story dated September 1, 1939, entitled, "Japan Forms Alliance With White Supremacists in Well-Thought-Out Scheme". (If you are unfortunate enough to not have access to the book, this link seems to have the news story.)  It concludes with a quote from Hitler on the occasion:  "I salute you, chinky-dinky rat men, who have been given life by the confused hand of some long-dead pagan deity," he said. "When Germany stands victorious on a conquered Earth, and Aryan supermen wipe out the undesirable mud races one by one, your like will surely survive to be among the last to be exterminated."  Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hitler had a great admiration for Italy, both for its Fascist politics and for its artistic richness (he was a failed painter). Nazi scientists even declared that the ancient Roman people were of pure nordic blood (I think they found some rune inscriptions in Val Camonica). Hitler decided not to invade Sud Tirol, an ethnic germanic region in Italy, he instead gave to Italy egemony over the Mediterranean sea. Not every Nazi official thought the same (Goebbles was annoyed by the fact that Italians were offended when considered different form Germans). Hitler was also admired by the total devotion of Japanese people for their Emperor (he had the same feelings for Muslims), but he undoubtely considered them an inferior race (when asked about his alliance with Japan, Hitler said that he would be more than happy to make a deal with the devil himself in order to win the war). I think that's also important to note that the principal policy of Nazi Germany was Realpolitik. When Mussolini was defeated, Germany planned to annex large parts of North-Eastern Italy and even to reward Cossak Nazi fighters with Carnia (it was to be called Kosakenland). Hitler initially intended to keep Netherlands as a partial indipendent nation just to maintain their colonies in the East. When they promised Dutch colonies to Japan, they changed their mind and decided to integrate Netherlands as a province of the Reich. Hitler was initially more than eager to give to Britain free hand over their Empire in exange of total German domination over central Europe. Hitler was extremely skilful when it comes to flatter other nations and people with incredibly big prospects: to Italy a New Roman Empire, to Hungary egemony over the Pannonian plain, to Bulgaria Macedonia and eastern Greece, to Finland parts of Russia (for example Karelia), to Japan the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, ... --151.51.45.45 (talk) 19:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, a failed painter. I'm reminded of Samuel Beckett's "To be an artist is to fail as no others dare fail".  Hitler certainly dared to do things that nobody else would have dreamed of doing.  But not in a good way.  --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   20:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * If human life is taken as inviolable, certainly. If not -- well it's an ugly stew but it's been frequently served throughout antiquity, and even today. Vranak (talk) 21:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

primal fear and catatonia
Does primal fear/self preservation override catatonia- for example, would a vicious, barking german shepherd leaping at someone snap them out of a fixed catatonic position? How about something like the room being on fire? Would they respond to any external stimulus (i.e. reflex actions like pulling your hand away from a flame or blinking the eye when an object comes at your face quickly)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammeg01 (talk • contribs) 03:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I would look to Thích Quảng Đức as an example that would suggest otherwise, although a barking dog may have a little more force and personality than mere flame. Vranak (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Since catatonia is often considered to be an extreme form of fear reaction, an increase in the level of fear would be unlikely as a solution - it's more likely to deepen the state. -- Ludwigs 2  15:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Exactly. Deer in the headlights and so on. What, no article? No mention in the deer article? Vranak (talk) 15:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Cite references, you slobs. Our Catatonia article does not claim it's "often considered to be an extreme form of fear reaction", probably because it is not.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please be polite. For your good as well as ours. Vranak (talk) 18:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

An Interesting GK Question
I am looking for the place which is the birth place of

1. one of America's most popular female singers, 2. the mother of one of America's most distinguished senators 3.  America's youngest political office holders of all time

It was also long time home to one of America's favorite fathers

I would appreciate any help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.76.229 (talk) 14:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you direct us to the URL of this quiz? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * How much money is in it for the Reference Desk? We need some hard disk upgrades.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Well the youngest president was Theodore Roosevelt, he was born in New York. THere's many a famous female singers from New York and no doubt many distinguished senators from there too. Not sure if 'youngest political office holder' means President or just youngest person in the senate/congressman who my google-fu suggests was Harold Ford Jr who was born in Memphis - which is home to Tina Turner (though isn't she from Nutbush?) 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, she is from Nutbush, which, contrary to the song "Nutbush City Limits," is actually unincorporated and therefore has no city limits. It's not rare but not unheard-of for teenagers to be elected to city councils in the U.S.; there has even been an 18-year-old mayor in Michigan and an 18-year-old state legislator in Ohio. It's hard to imagine a younger office holder outside of a monarchy. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Brian Zimmerman was elected mayor of Crabb, Texas at the age of 11 in a landslide. (He got 23 of the 30 votes cast.) I don't think anyone else remotely famous came out of that town. Many others were elected at the age of 18. See List of the youngest mayors in the United States. —D. Monack talk 07:56, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * "Most distinguished senators" makes me think of Ted Kennedy, whose mother was from Boston, as is Donna Summer. Don't know about the young office holders. And what about those favorite fathers. Maybe a television program like The Cosby Show? 83.81.42.44 (talk) 18:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Cheers? The father in question could be Frasier Crane, but that is a bit of a stretch, because I don't think his son Frederick was seen very much. 83.81.42.44 (talk) 18:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The quiz's answer has been published: Muskogee, Oklahoma. Carrie Underwood, John McCain's mother, Robert Reed, and a teenage mayor. 63.17.44.82 (talk) 04:33, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Has the UK population become very much more intelligent in recent decades?
I've nothing against lots of people going to university, but I'm curious about the statistics. When I went to university only about the top ten percent of the ability range did so in the UK. But this article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8596504.stm says that around 50% now do so. I'm surprised that someone with an IQ of 100 (or less) should be able to complete a university degree.

What is the explaination? Has the population become considerably more intelligent in recent decades, so that an average IQ is the equivalent of an IQ of 125 or more in the past? Or is there some other explaination? Thanks 78.147.25.63 (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * In the US, the comparable phenomenon could be explained as devaluation of the degree.--Wetman (talk) 16:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the degree may have been devalued, but that's perhaps the result not the cause...the cause may be that the educational system is able to get people to a higher level of learning (not be confused with intelligence) than they once were, and the economic ability for more people to go to college (US)/university (UK)...--达伟 (talk) 16:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Or, in other words, "dumbing down" the curriculum. StuRat (talk) 16:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Average intelligence isn't going to increase in a few decades via evolution, as that would take many thousands of years and a strong evolutionary pressure (such as stupid people all dying). You could possibly increase intelligence that quickly by artificial means, such as eugenics or genetic engineering, but obviously that hasn't happened anywhere, yet. StuRat (talk) 16:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * However, the mean value of IQ test scores (which may or may not correlate with whatever we call "intelligence") has certainly been observed to increase over time - this is called the Flynn effect. IQ tests are re-normalised periodically to correct for this (so that the mean score is set back to 100). Gandalf61 (talk) 16:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be because learned behavior can change far more rapidly the biological evolution could. And my personal observations would indicate that genes account for less then upbringing.  Googlemeister (talk) 16:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There have been various explanations of the Flynn effect from statistical anomalies or people being more used to the style of test to better education or even better nutrition. The article has some discussion of possible causes. --Tango (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * IQ is a measure of ability to do IQ tests, it doesn't necessarily correlate particularly strongly with ability to perform well in higher education. It is probably a combination of better primary and secondary education and devalued degrees. It is very difficult to get conclusive evidence for this kind of thing, though. You can't, for example, just give a 1960s exam to current students and see how they do, since they haven't been taught to the same syllabus. --Tango (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but you're exactly wrong there. The only thing IQ scores correlate strongly with is the ability to do well in higher education. --Carnildo (talk) 00:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * In the US, the general result is that the "bottom" has expanded a lot in the last many decades. The top is still the top, but there are tons of opportunities for non-top-10% students to get degrees of one sort or another. Amongst academics it is pretty common knowledge that the students at these schools (mostly the ever-increasing state schools that are at the bottom of the prestige system) are on the whole a lot less prepared and able to perform than students at the more competitive schools. I only offer this up as a caveat to the "dumbing down" approach—it's not that the entire system needs to be "dumbed down" to accommodate more people of less skill, it just requires that you create more places that are less competitive and have lower standards. The "good" students are still on the whole going to "good" universities. It's just that there are more places available for students who wouldn't otherwise be able to get into the top schools (for a variety of reasons, not just intelligence). --Mr.98 (talk) 16:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

This is about the UK. What about these "Foundation" degrees that I've vaguely heard about? Does everyone take the kind of degree I did, or are there watered down lower-ability versions now that are still called "degrees"? 78.147.25.63 (talk) 16:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Foundation degree explains it. It isn't equivalent to a regular degree, it's a vocational qualification that takes a year or two. Officially, all Bachelors degrees are equal (although they come in different classifications - 1st, 2:1, 2:2, 3rd and pass), but in reality a degree from a better university is better. Degrees in different subjects have very different earning potentials as well. --Tango (talk) 17:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, they've gotten smart enough that they're slowly taking back their empire, using brains and not just braun. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that the only barrier to higher education today or in the past has been a lack of ability. If only 10% of Britons attended university at some time in the past, I doubt that they were the top 10% purely in terms of ability.  Class and class expectations surely played a role.  An intellectually gifted son of a mechanic might have been convinced by his family and even his secondary-school teachers that it would be a waste of his time to try for university and that he should attend a trade school instead.  I don't live in the UK, but my sense is that class prejudice has lessened in recent decades.  Similarly, intelligent young women might have been discouraged from attending university in the past because it would complicate their marriage prospects or be a waste of time for a person whose object in life was marriage and motherhood.  This is obviously no longer true.  The result may be that today's undergraduates are not much less able than the students of years past, but that they are more numerous because they come from a wider range of backgrounds.  Marco polo (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

So now all the hairdressers and car-mechanics are getting foundation degrees? (Excuse me showing a flash of intellectual snobbery). In other words its just a renaming of whatever they did before? 78.147.25.63 (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Another change that has taken place in the UK and other developed economies in recent decades is the decline in manufacturing, agricultural, and artisanal employment, which did not require a university degree, and a dramatic increase in "white-collar" jobs requiring a university degree. I'm not sure whether hairdressers and car mechanics in the UK need university degrees.  I rather doubt it.  However, the denizens of the vast office complexes that have sprung up in city centers and near motorway junctions since the 1960s are required to have university degrees.  So there has been a change not only in the supply of degree candidates but also in the demand for degrees.  Again, I don't think that we can necessarily draw any conclusions from this about the qualifications of the degree candidates.  Marco polo (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Any useful measure of intelligence will include just that -- a defined measure. General knowledge of the arts, sciences, world events, facts and trivia -- is that what you are asking about 78.147? Vranak (talk) 20:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Some other factors in the UK... 1) Many more university places than 30 years ago and many Polytechnics are now universities. 2) Teachers are much more focussed on exam success than previously - it now affects their career prospects and the success of the school is measured in results. This was not the case 30 years ago. 3) A Levels used to be marked so that a fixed percentage of those sitting the exam received a specific grade (ie maybe only the top 10% would get an "A" grade). Now there is only a 3% failure rate. Alansplodge (talk) 08:51, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Being a citizen of the UK, my impartial, well-reasoned, highly-intelligent and unequivocal answer is: yes --Jubilee♫ clipman  12:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

78.147.25.63 -- Thirty years ago, the UK had a lower proportion of college-educated people than most other developed (OECD) countries, and this was considered by some to be an obstacle to economic competitiveness. The change has been probably at least partially because of deliberate policy changes... AnonMoos (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Impossible feats of heroism?
I was doing some research on my great-great-grandfather, and I found some records of his particularly impressive. So impressive, in fact, that I find it hard to believe that he was actually involved in both in so short of a time. First we have the 1917 article "Northern New York Man Gets Medal for Heroism", where Chief Gunner's Mate John F. Woolshlager of Castorland is given a letter of commendation from the Navy for saving the life of a man on the USS Wyoming during WWI. It goes on to say that he will be re-enlisting in the Navy later that year. Then we have this citation, the Distinguished Service Cross, being given to First Lieutenant John F. Woolshlager (again, of Castorland) for heroism in the battle of Grand Pre in 1918. My great-grandfather, his son, born 1921, is the only other John F. Woolshlager I can find. So, my question is this: could these two records really be talking about the same guy, or is the only conclusion that there were three generations of John F. Woolshlager's in Castorland? (Or maybe something I haven't thought of?) &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 16:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * They could certainly be talking about the same person, though he would have had to be promoted from enlisted to officer in the time between. There does not seem to be a wikipedia article for the battle of Grand Pre in 1918, only the one in 1747.  Googlemeister (talk) 16:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Not only would he have to have been promoted to officer status, but would have to have transferred from Navy to Infantry. Of course the US joined WWI between the two, so it is just possible that John F. Woolshlager thought he could serve his country better in the Infantry during time of war. How big was the barrier between enlisted and officer class in the US in 1917? I know that in the UK officer status was very much a class thing, and promotions to officer were very rare. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:42, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Promotions in the navy were not to do with class, but with proving oneself in battle, the problem was that naval battles were very rare in the decades prior to 1914. 80.47.196.55 (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It is true that before WWI being commissioned from the ranks was fairly unusual, but it became considerably less so during the war due to the rapid expansion of the armed forces, and of course the Chief of the Imperial General Staff for part of the war had himself risen from trooper in cavalry regiment to field marshal, see William Robertson.


 * In answer to the actual question, it's certianly not impossible, I don't know how availble US census records are for that era, for the UK I'd be checking the 1911 census to see if there were other people with that name - immigration records might also show if there were others. David Underdown (talk) 18:42, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You could always submit a request for records to the Personnel recordscenter in St Louis for his military records and see what it says. Chances are good his navy record may still be there although a large amount of the Army records (about 80 million) were destroyed in the 73 records fire. You could also contact the Naval Historical Center or libary/archives at the washington Navy Yard and see if they haev anything on him. They may not have a bio on him on hand but they maintain all the cruise logs for naval vessels and have lists of personnel, ship crews, certain awards, etc and tey might be able to look that up for you. --Kumioko (talk) 18:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I was going to say the same thing about looking up his records. I looked up my grandfather's military record and it didn't take very long for them to send them to me. The xerox copies they sent showed evidence of both charring around the edges and water damage. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The LDS have digitized all names in the 1880 US census and made them public . No Woolshlagers there. The guy you know about was quite likely not born then, but this can be an indication that he did not have a father with the same name who lived in the US in 1880. Of course, his father could have immigrated after 1880, changed his name, have had his name misspelled, or be missing in the records even if he lived in the country at the time. Jørgen (talk) 19:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Summary of material removed: Same man was found in 1900, 1910, and 1920 federal census, and in 1920 he was living in an army hospital, listed as a patient, and notes that he was an army officer. Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks like you found them in the 1900 Census as well. Auntieruth55 (talk) 19:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC) Auntieruth55 (talk) 19:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * If anyone else is wondering (as I did) Grandpre is in the Argonne Forest; the battle took place in October 1918. The best map I could quickly find was provided by a hotelier [] Zoonoses (talk) 00:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't you know, WHAAOE - Grandpré, Ardennes. I couldn't find it earlier since I was looking under "Grand Pre". Auntieruth, I guess that census material confirms that he did somehow jump from enlisted Navy to Army officer somewhere between 1917 and 1918.  Thanks for all the help everybody.  Just as a side note, I don't suppose that those two events of recognition would qualify for Wikipedia's notability requirements?  (I started a userspace draft just in case.) I'm thinking it's possible, but I'm not keeping my hopes up. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 02:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think he quite makes notability, although the hedaline of the first article refers to a medal, the body of the article seems to suggest it was more a letter of commendation, and it's generally been held that only (for the US military) Medal of Honor recipients where we can assume notability - see WP:MILPEOPLE. The articles Forest of Argonne and Meuse-Argonne Offensive should help give you a better idea of what was going on at the time.  David Underdown (talk) 08:54, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Notability in the greater world is not the same thing as notability at home. You might consider showing your documents to the local VFW or American Legion post.  Some of them have museums displaying documents and medals and photographs.  You might get free drinks for a while (until they start asking when you're going to West Point....)  Zoonoses (talk) 02:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

What happened to old Chinese coins when dynasties fell?
Thanks. Imagine Reason (talk) 16:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Ancient coins, unlike most modern ones, had value because of the precious metals they contained. Therefore, the old coins would have retained their value.  The new dynasty might have offered a trade-in period where the old coins could be traded for the new ones (and then melted down the old ones to create more new ones).  If not, the old coins would likely stay in circulation along with the new until they became rare enough, due to normal attrition, that people started keeping them as collector's items.  And, even if there was a trade-in period, some old coins would survive in ship wrecks, buried in people's back yards, etc.    StuRat (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That seems to be the most logical explanation for it. It would have basically been an exchange ("Give us your old coins, we'll melt them down and give you new coins"); essentially the same idea as the modern gold exchange, except that the thing you got back also had value. Cam (Chat) 18:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Remember, the Chinese fully understood that the "value" was largely conventional: they invented paper money (as well as the paper it was printed on and the technology of printing with ink). The coinage that remained in circulation was not necessarily the newest, but the most debased, i/e. the coins with the least intrinsic "value": "Bad money drives out good".--Wetman (talk) 19:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Did Bill Gates start Microsoft with his parents' money?
The article History of Microsoft didn't say, or I didn't see it. Thanks.20.137.18.50 (talk) 18:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Triumph of the Nerds has quite a bit about the origin of Micro-Soft. Between it and History of Microsoft we get that he remained at Harvard (using Harvard's computers) until he and Allen had persuaded Ed Roberts to start selling Altair Basic, and only then did he quit and go to Albuquerque where they founded Micro-Soft. So at that point Micro-Soft would be cash positive - I don't know to what extend, but Altairs were selling like crazy so it's very likely they were making a reasonable income. In Albuquerque they lived, and worked, in the Sundowner Motel opposite MITS' office (so he clearly was living on little money). Triumph of the Nerds suggests, but doesn't say for sure, that they grew purely from generated revenue (it does say that Apple did, a few years later, with a very similar growth curve). So, beyond paying for him to be at Harvard, there's not much indication that his parents gave much help. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Doesn't fully answer the question, but this Cracked article may be of interest to you. Vimescarrot (talk) 05:51, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Find board of directors of california corporations
Where can one find the members of the board of directors or officers for a california corporation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VedanaCo (talk • contribs) 18:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Start with the company website, then the California Secretary of State, then the SEC website. ---—  Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 19:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Bach cantatas
Which J.S. Bach cantatas were written in the key of C major?96.232.11.68 (talk) 20:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The Bach article has a lot of links and references that may be of help in tracking this info down. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * This [] seems to be pretty comprehensive for Bach cantatas in any key. Zoonoses (talk) 00:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

What's the point of learning Irish?
This is an honest question and I don't want to offend anyone, I just would like to understand something. Why does the Irish government want to create a bilingual Ireland (Irish/English) and not just use the language they're currently native speakers of, that is, English? I see no practical reason for doing so, only maybe "national pride" or something. So, why do you think that is? --Belchman (talk) 22:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * "'National pride' or something" was spot on. The Reference Desk is not a substitute for an opinion forum, however.--Wetman (talk) 22:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Why would anyone want their home country's ancient language to die out? That is like everyone in China switching to English as the national language. There is actually a very good short film called "My Name is Yu Ming" about a young Chinese man who learns Gaelic and later travels to Ireland to learn no one speaks it. It is basically a call for people to learn the language so it won't die out. See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA0a62wmd1A&NR=1. - Ghostexorcist (talk) 23:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec) "Why would anyone want their home country's ancient language to die out?" If my home country had an obscure and isolate language which is clearly worse than English I would support switching to English completely. Of course, not using it in everyday and formal communication doesn't mean that we will completely forget the language, as we haven't completely forgotten Latin, for example. --Belchman (talk) 23:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I recommend, which discusses the various reasons why languages die and why some people work to sustain or revive them. --ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * No one speaks it? See Gaeltacht.  Woogee (talk) 23:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Agree with Wetman that our opinions are not appropriate, but I hazard a guess that the records of debates and reports of the Houses of the Oireachtas will somewhere show justifications given for public expenditure necessary to foster the Irish langauge. So there are factual paths still open to us. Education in the Republic of Ireland notes that "a student attending a school which receives public money must be taught the language". Ah/ Here you go. An Irish Government  Statement on the Irish Language 2006 sets out their fairly contemporary thoughts on the matter: "The Government believes that the Irish language is of particular importance for the people, society and culture of Ireland. As a spoken community language, Irish is unique to this country and is, therefore, of crucial importance to the identity of the Irish people and to world heritage." and goes on to set out a 20 year strategy for the language, or, if you prefer, "Cuirfear straitéis fiche bliain don Ghaeilge le chéile bunaithe ar na cuspóirí atá leagtha amach sa cháipéis seo."


 * The government statement asserts that "according to surveys and opinion polls, most of the population believes that Irish is of particular importance for themselves personally and/or for the country as a whole." Perhaps it is then an expression of the will of the people?


 * Meanwhile, here's what the Irish green Party has to say in justification for policy relating to the Irish language. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd say that one reason we want to keep a language alive is the same reason we like to have fine art. A more practical reason is that it keeps access to existing historical records and literary works easier. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 23:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * In a related vein, the same question in regard to Scottish Gaelic, was the subject of this episode of David Mitchell's soapbox. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 23:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * People take pride in their language. It's part of their shared heritage and entity. It connects them to their sense of their deep past; it is a rich cultural product. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * James Joyce around 100 years ago had something to say about this subject. His opinions are explained more concisely in Dubliners and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man than in the later books Ulysses and Finnegan's Wake.  Hemingway claimed Joyce spoke Italian in Paris (and both his and Nora's children had Italian names).  Then there's Samuel Beckett who wrote his plays in French, translating them into English himself.  If Beckett spoke in Irish it was only to curse.  (Not to say there's anything wrong with a good cursing vocabulary -- bot unfortunately, English is woefully bereft of good curse words).  Zoonoses (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Euphonics, perhaps. The French would never give up their language, I'm sure, due to its 'ear feel'. Irish may have similar euphonic features . Vranak (talk) 03:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

The deal with language is that language is more than simply code for ideas. Language is part of the culture in which it develops, and when a language is lost, there are parts of the culture that are lost with it. For one thing, there are concepts in each language that cannot be properly expressed outside that language. The linguistic and cultural context is lost. Consider a language like German for example. A German word like "Volk" lacks a single, easy to translate word in a language like English. We say it means "folk" or "people" or "nation" or whatnot, but its a cumbersome thing to express outside of German. There's something in the German character and culture that gives the word its definition; all Germans know exactly what it means, but its hard to translate properly outside of German. Schadenfreude is another example; no single English word or phrase properly captures its meaning. The bullshit story about Eskimos having 100 words for snow is bullshit, but it has a nugget of truth in the idea that the language of a people is intimately tied into the culture of a people; and it is impossible to fully preserve a culture if the language is lost. Its part of why the French are so fiercely protective of their language; theres value for French people in French culture, and French language is part of that. So when a language like Irish Gaelic dies out, it takes aspects of Irish culture with it. Irish culture becomes less "Irish" when it loses its language. -- Jayron  32  04:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Remember that the decision to support and promote Irish was made (officially) over 80 years ago, and unofficially in some of the various Irish independence movement even earlier than that...people's worldviews and political debates tended to be grounded in different sets of assumptions and values to some extent then--similarly, I would think the question of "what justifies the public expense of promoting Irish?" would be seen as a question whose answer is self-evident, among most of those in the leadership of the independence movements and subsequent early independent governments of Ireland--达伟 (talk) 07:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Am fear a chailleas a chanain caillidh e a shaoghal (Scottish Gaelic). "He who loses his language loses his world." A useful paper here on the revival of Manx Gaelic. Alansplodge (talk) 08:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * On this, see Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.--152.3.129.3 (talk) 15:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * One phrase to search for is language revival. That will lead you to websites, including blogs, that will give you opinions we are not supposed to indulge in here. For example, The Revival of Gaelic. Given your understandable cynicism, you may like this report: Modern Irish: A Case Study in Language Revival Failure. An Irish travel writer named Manchán Magan tried to go around his own country speaking Gaelic, for a programme called No Béarla, and so has an unusual perspective on the situation of his language. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be tought, it's stupid that it is, it takes valuable study time from actual important subjects.--92.251.164.176 (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you all for your answers. It looks like I'll have to read more about the subject. --Belchman (talk) 15:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a quite interesting similarity between the Gaelic education in Ireland and Swedish education in Finland. Swedish is spoken by 5% of the population in Finland, its not a particularily useful language outside Scandinavia but remains a mandatory subject for all school children. In short, the Swedish People's Party in the Finnish parliament is willing to support any government who retains Swedish education, and somehow Swedish continues begin taught in spite of being detested by major sections of pupils who merely see it as a waste of time. (A difference though, is that promoting Gaelic in Ireland is a form of national revival against the colonial legacy which sought to destroy Irish culture altogether, whilst Swedish in Finland is the language of the former colonialist power). --Soman (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2010 (UTC)