Are Historians Really Apolitical?
80% of members at the American Historical Association conference supported a resolution about "the U.S.-sponsored genocide perpetrated by Israel in Gaza."
In debates about originalism, historians claim the moral high ground. We are lectured that only those with doctorates, trained in the proper methodology, can place history in the proper context. And the historians insist that they, unlike conservative law professors, are apolitical, and bring no biases to their careful work.
Does anyone actually believe these claims? You shouldn't.
The New York Times reports from the annual meeting of the American Historical Association.
Leadership of the American Historical Association has vetoed two resolutions criticizing Israel's actions in Gaza that were approved by a member vote over the weekend, saying they lay outside the group's mission and would pose risks to the organization and the historical profession.
The first resolution criticized what it characterized as intentional "scholasticide" in Gaza, where most of the educational system, including all 12 universities, has been damaged or destroyed. The second condemned ongoing attacks on academic freedom at American universities, including the silencing of protest against "the U.S.-sponsored genocide perpetrated by Israel in Gaza."
Both resolutions passed with nearly 80 percent support from the almost 500 members who attended the vote, held on Saturday during the group's annual conference in Chicago. But on Sunday the 16 voting members of the executive council voted not to pass them on to the full membership of roughly 14,000 for final consideration.
"As worded the two resolutions fall outside the scope of the American Historical Association's chartered mission," the council said in a statement. "Approving them on behalf of the entire association would present institutional risk and have long-term implications for the discipline and the organization." . . .
The "scholasticide" measure was passed with 282 votes for, 76 against, and two abstentions. The academic freedom resolution passed 245 in favor, 62 against, with one abstention.
Professional historians are not apolitical. They lean overwhelmingly to the left, and are subject to the same sorts of biases as conservatives.
I suppose we should be thankful that the AALS is not venturing down this road. As left-wing as the legal professoriate is, it still seems moderate when compared to the liberal arts. The MLA, of course, passed the Gaza resolution:
The academic freedom resolution was developed in coordination with members of the Modern Language Association, the country's largest scholarly association in the humanities. Over the weekend, it was approved by that group's delegate assembly, by a vote of 61 in favor, 52 against. That resolution will now pass to a vote by the group's roughly 20,000 members, where it must receive a majority that also totals at least 10 percent of membership.
And you wonder why conservatives have taken such aggressive postures to higher education.