Historians Against the War

Sign the Statement

HAW Conference

Speakers Bureau

Press Releases and Statements

Virtual Movement Archive


Teaching Resources

GI Resistance

Civil Liberties and Academic Freedom


Join our Listserv

Download HAW images


About us / Contact us

Friday, April 17, 2009

[haw-info] New HAW statement approved

Members and Friends of Historians Against the War,

Voting has been completed on ratification of the proposed new basic statement of HAW, and the result was 194Yes votes (93%) and 14 No votes, so the statement has been adopted. Many thanks to those who took the time to vote, and to those who provided feedback on an earlier draft of the statement.

As a result of the vote, a better-defined category of "members" of HAW has been created. People who find themselves in substantial agreement(broadly defined) with the statement are invited to go to http://www.historiansagainstwar.org/statement.html and fill out a four-item form. This web page also has the text of the statement.

Those who are currently on the "HAW-Info" list but do not choose to become members of HAW will be kept on the list, for purposes of occasional informational e-mailings, as in the past.

Jim O'Brien and Marc Becker
co-chairs, Historians Against the War

Note: You are receiving this email because you signed a Historians Against the War statement (see http://www.historiansagainstwar.org/). If you no longer wish to receive these occasional messages about HAW's work, send an email to haw-info-request@stopthewars.org?subject=unsubscribe.
haw-info mailing list


Blogger Mark said...

I comment here as a member of the HAW steering committee who contributed to the discussion behind this document. During the discussion, I actually voted in favor of some changes which were not included in the final draft. I think it is important, however, to express _substantial_ agreement. A major problem with intellectuals, freethinkers, protesters, and members of various movements is that getting them to move in one direction is like herding cats. I will not back off of the statement because I do not 100% agree with one or two terms or because I would have liked to see some phrase included that was not. The thrust of the statement rings true for me, as does most all of the substance, so I am on board. This is not compromising principles or backing down. On the contrary, I consider it a contribution toward progress in the direction we all want to go.

6:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home