Humanities desk
< March 24	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 26 >

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.

March 25

1917 French Army mutinies

The article 1917 French Army mutinies says, "However, there are still undisclosed archives on the mutinies, which are believed to contain documents mostly of a political nature; they will not be opened to researchers until 100 years after the mutinies, in 2017." Where would one find information about the documents which were, or should have been, released last year? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is some info here [1], particularly the top reply by lestratege which currently has 411 points and maybe also the reply by abracar with 112 points. The answer appears to be, as you may expect is that in many cases it's likely in some cases you'll have to visit the archives in person to find out everything now available. Nil Einne (talk)

You would have thought that one or two journalists might have made their way to the archives, but there's nothing on Google. My hunch is that the 100 years started at the end of the various trials rather than at the end of the mutinies themselves, so there may be a few months to wait yet. Alansplodge (talk) 08:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried searching in French, with Google set to return French-language responses? I don't know how much you'll find in English about an episode of this sort, if it was essentially a purely French matter. Eliyohub (talk) 03:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oui, il n'y a aucun. I only found this article from April 2017 which says that the archives will be made available to researchers "this year". Alansplodge (talk) 14:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the 1917 French mutinies have been of great interest to English language writers. A quick Google finds these books:

There are also a large number of articles and whole chapters in other works on the First World War. Alansplodge (talk) 08:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Views of America's youth on the US military and aggression

I'm looking for survey data about America's youth.

I wish to know if they support large spending on the US military compared with older people in the US.

I also wish to know if they would approve of a new war, and if their approval rate would be higher or lower than that of older people in US society.

Thank you kindly for any feedback on this tall order.

Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The public favors cutting defense spending, not adding billions more, new survey finds (March 2017) is based on a "survey by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC)", but I have so far failed to find the original online. If there are demographic details included, it isn't merntioned in the article. Alansplodge (talk) 16:19, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anna_Frodesiak -- impressionistically, many of those who came of age in the Reaganite 1980s (when there was a kind of backlash to the perceived excesses of the 1960s and 1970s, and the Soviet Union was still a threat) were kind of hawkish, while those coming of age 30 years later, in the aftermath of an economic crisis and many years of seemingly fruitless fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, are less likely to be gung-ho. The most recent solid numbers I can find are from 2006[2], but of course that was before the Great Recession, and there have been a dozen more years of fighting in Afghanistan since then... AnonMoos (talk) 19:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, folks. Interesting reading, indeed.

Alansplodge, the article you provide seems to have an error, no? "...Democrats would hike education spending by $3 million..." should be "...billion...", I think.

I'm sure you're right. Alansplodge (talk) 07:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos, the near-2003-war date on that article makes it difficult to draw conclusions, but very interesting anyway.

Thank you both! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]