Humanities desk
< November 12	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 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.

November 13[edit]

Significant demographic changes in Russia between 1897 and the start of World War I?[edit]

Other than seeing significant growing in its total population, did any significant demographic changes occur in Russia between the 1897 Imperial Russian Census and the start of World War I in August 1914? Imperial Russia planned to hold another census in December 1915, but this plan got cancelled due to World War I breaking out 1.5 years earlier--specifically in July 1914. However, do we have any other data and/or information that would allow us to see if anything in Russia's demographics was significantly different in 1913-1914 than it was back in 1897? Futurist110 (talk) 00:12, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No change in Russian Poland. Poland was partitioned before 1897 and was reconstituted after World War I. No change in Finland. Finland was annexed before 1897 and declared independence during World War I.
Sleigh (talk) 02:38, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The southern half of Sakhalin island was ceded to Japan (with a population of 406,557 in 1941 including immigrants from Korea).
Sleigh (talk) 03:01, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Anyway, though, I was thinking more in terms of migration here. Futurist110 (talk) 06:53, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Russia's population growth rate from 1850 to 1910 was the fastest of all the major powers except for the United States". [1]. Alansplodge (talk) 09:07, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also Russia's Growing Population which says that Russians married young and bred like proverbial rabbits.

Thanks for that article! Futurist110 (talk) 21:10, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Migration seems to have been going in the opposite direction due to the pogroms in the Russian Empire.

Alansplodge (talk) 09:11, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For Jews specifically. Not necessarily for non-Jewish Russian ethnic groups. Futurist110 (talk) 21:10, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Pogroms in the Russian Empire. DOR (HK) (talk) 22:44, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why Chips?[edit]

Our article says that Henry Channon acquired the nickname "Chips" at Oxford. Why Chips? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to this, it's because he once shared a house with someone nicknamed "Fish". Clarityfiend (talk) 20:40, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a better source. (Read it quick, before the subscription screen appears.) Clarityfiend (talk) 20:42, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Clarityfiend: Thank you. Now... who was Fish? DuncanHill (talk) 01:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Compelling visually evidence it's this guy. A couple more theories, pun on "ships", brought potato chips to a cocktail party[2]. fiveby(zero) 02:43, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Potato chips??? In Oxford? Chips are made from potato, certainly; but they're something you serve at table, not something you bring to a cocktail party. (Yes, I do know). --ColinFine (talk) 14:21, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Migration and an increase in crime in Northern US cities?[edit]

Did the Great Migration of African-Americans to the Northern US (and, to a lesser extent, the Western US) cause an increase (especially a large increase) in crime in Northern US cities? I know that in the present-day US there is a large correlation between an area's black percentage and its crime rate:

https://www.unz.com/runz/race-and-crime-in-america/

Thoughts? Futurist110 (talk) 21:12, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure there was an increase in reports of crime and crime statistics and arrests as southern blacks began to run into white sheriffs up north. 199.66.69.13 (talk) 21:55, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that crime statistics weren't recorded in the Southern US, or what? Futurist110 (talk) 22:35, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you suppose there are any stats about the crimes committed by white immigrants against native Americans? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Against native Americans or against Native Americans? Futurist110 (talk) 02:20, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Native Americans ARE native Americans. HiLo48 (talk) 02:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You mean to say that in the American Indian Wars the U.S. Army fought against its own people? --Lambiam 11:16, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But very far from the only ones! Futurist110 (talk) 03:47, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fun fact: "native Americans" are twice as likely to commit crimes as "illegal aliens"[3], while "Native Americans" appear to be even more likely, but nobody can tell for sure.[4] 93.136.22.169 (talk) 19:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This just shows the problem of naming people or things and also being correct or polite."Native American" is correct but imprecise. "Red Indian" was incorrect on two accounts. "Indian" is wrong. "Amerindian" may be better. I have only seen this in South American contexts. "Aboriginal" is probably insulting and implies Australia in British minds. "First nation(al)" may be better. I have only seen it used in Canadian contexts (it includes Inuit as well I think.) There may be other terms. What else could one use.Spinney Hill (talk) 10:03, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How about "the people who were already here". That covers most any immigration scenario. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:50, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How about "the people"? (Does imprecise labelling of people ever achieve anything positive?) HiLo48 (talk) 20:53, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to collapse the above disruptive/off-topic tangent. 199.66.69.13 (talk) 13:19, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, how sweet. Making a racist argument, perhaps ignorantly, citing Ron Unz, and his white supremacist, racist, holocaust denial, antisemitic website. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 15:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the Unz Review has also sometimes argued against the conventional alt-right narrative, such as here: https://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-hispanic-crime/ -- and here: https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-holocaust-in-the-ussr/ But, in any case, if Ron Unz's race and crime data in that article is wrong, it would certainly be nice to see where exactly it is wrong. Futurist110 (talk) 20:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)There is no lack of literature that would inform on this topic as simple searches show. If you are serious you might follow references in this Harvard working paper. My "thoughts" are that there are more appropriate and informative places to look than Unz Review. fiveby(zero) 16:04, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I'll check it out! Futurist110 (talk) 20:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Large-scale migration tends to cause reports of increases in crime for several reasons. First, larger populations have more crime. Second, people without established homes, jobs, or other connections to a community may be more likely to commit crimes. Third, many people seek to blame society's ills on those who are not local, i.e., migrants. It's a well-established form of bigotry. DOR (HK) (talk) 22:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC) .[reply]