Endorsement
After several conversations and calls for input, the Archival Workers Collective (AWC) elected to endorse the Librarians and Archivists with Palestine (LAP) 2023 statement on Gaza. We note that not all members of AWC are in full agreement with the statement in its entirety or in parts. Additionally, several members feel the endorsement is out of scope of the AWC group’s current focus on advocacy, research, and programming work addressing labor issues within the archival profession in the United States. We welcome these conversations and note that part of the LAP statement calls for having these “difficult conversations with [your] community.” Additionally, we’d like to clarify that AWC condemns hate speech and action against Jewish, Arab, or Muslim individuals and communities across the globe, and condemns Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism. AWC also stands against censorship in the workplace and in personal life.
The Librarians and Archivists with Palestine statement includes a link to resources on that site, and the Los Angeles Archives Collective Statement of Solidarity with Palestine offers resources for learning and action. Again, to quote the LAP statement, “As information workers [we] strive to foster dialogue and learning….].” We do not expect these conversations to be easy, but do anticipate that they will be fruitful in continuing the work of AWC and articulating what it means to be an archival worker and discussing our shared (and differing) values and opinions, and how to act upon them collectively. Below is an overview of points of discussion that emerged, and how that discussion unfolded.
It doesn’t take an archivist to object to mass killing. Some matters particularly galvanize us as archival workers:
- Solidarity with Palestinian archival workers. We heed the call for solidarity from Palestinian workers, in archives and beyond. Risking death and displacement, as Palestinian archival workers in Gaza do by dint of existing, is the ultimate precarity.
- Destruction of memory. We observe with horror the destruction of cultural and memory resources: archives, libraries, records, memorials, community centers, and schools. These harms to cultural heritage sites have long-term implications for history, memory, and futurity.
- Workplace censorship. Speaking about Palestine brings down both soft and hard workplace censorship on workers in the U.S., Israel, and elsewhere. Some of the highest-profile cases have been academics and journalists, but archival workers experience it too. In particular, archival workers in government agencies should not be punished for exercising free speech. That endorsing the LAP statement or otherwise speaking publicly about Palestine carries differential workplace risks is a labor issue.
- Silencing the past and present. Widespread reticence in the U.S. about making strong statements – or speaking at all – and lack of curiosity about Palestine recalls other struggles over silencing history. Outright, top-down censorship is deeply connected to archival work, but so is self-policing of expression and inquiry.
- Information work matters. Contention over language (even to the point of weaponization), and the political and material consequences that ensue from such contention, are deeply relevant to archival work. So is the need to find and use appropriate information. Perhaps most relevant of all are the power relations that shape (both stabilizing and destabilizing) what constitutes facts, useful and appropriate knowledge, and so on. We find this to be true of media reports, activist and government discourses, and our own conversations about Gaza in and out of archival practice and organizing.
Even as we understand what the current conflict means for archives, records, memory, and knowledge, many of us remain focused on people, rather than archives and libraries alone, in the midst of genocide following a mass terror attack following decades of colonization and domination. And we take to heart the reminder that Gaza is just one of several war zones around the world at this time, that hyperfocus on a “single” conflict is a persistent problem in public discourse in the U.S.
AWC Process and Discussion
Below, we describe the process through which we developed this position. This is not only because AWC members are not unanimous in our support for the LAP statement, but also to show transparency in our group’s decision-making process on a difficult topic. From the beginning, we knew that a whole-group conversation would be necessary, no matter what we decided regarding specific actions. We agreed that longer-term engagement with Palestinian archivists and LAP should be part of how we develop our own international consciousness and build solidarity among archival workers. For instance, we can learn a great deal from LAP’s decade of activity focused on information worlds in Palestine.
We first discussed possible action related to Gaza during a regular monthly meeting (November 17) with low attendance. We talked over the statement as well as other actions that it would be possible to take as AWC and/or individual members, such as:
- Write our own open letter
- Share out LAP’s work without an explicit endorsement, or as individuals
- Share LAP resources other than the statement, such as the group’s Gaza Toolkit and One Book, Many Communities campaign
- Seek out organizer training as groundwork for future action
- Make an overall commitment to solidarity while also addressing the capacity individuals have or need to honor the group commitment; for instance mobilizing to support those for whom it’s hard to speak up at work
- Talk with coworkers 1:1 if conversations about Palestine are shut out of shared forums
- Find affiliated groups (e.g. alumni, academic archivists) who can make statements without being constrained in the same way as employees
At an ad hoc meeting specifically on the topic (December 6), we considered whether to retweet/boost the statement as “members of the Archival Workers Collective,” whether different forms of sharing on social media would constitute endorsement, and whether to fully endorse as a group. We distributed a brief survey to the members list asking everyone to weigh in on the following:
- Should AWC endorse the LAP statement?
- Should AWC share the LAP statement on social media?
- Would either of the above actions put you at risk in your workplace?
- Additional comments on the matter
We circulated lists of resources alongside the form:
- Information about what’s happening in Gaza, primarily from organizations in solidarity with Palestine
- Examples of labor groups organizing in support of ceasefire
- Information about online safety and doxxing
At the following monthly meeting (December 15), we reviewed and discussed survey responses to date. This conversation built on the previous two meetings, leading to both areas of consensus (see top of this post and below) as well as other areas of deliberation and disagreement (see below). Following the meeting, we recirculated the survey, encouraging anyone who wished to share more details about their responses to also reach out to one or more meeting attendees directly. Given an emerging lack of unanimity, process came to matter even more.
Ultimately, nearly all who responded to the survey approved endorsing the statement, with about a third indicating that they disagreed with some parts of the statement but would be all right with AWC endorsing it. The group was evenly divided between those who didn’t consider it an individual workplace risk for AWC to endorse or share the statement, and those for whom it might be.
Responses and reactions were not unanimous on either action, or about whether this was an appropriate matter for AWC to concern ourselves with at all. Two members questioned whether political and humanitarian issues are relevant to the group’s purpose of labor advocacy. One took issue with the LAP statement, characterizing it as “full of pejorative terms and misinformation.” Between meetings and the survey, two members hesitated over a line in the LAP statement: “We insist our governments end military assistance to Israel, diplomatic cover for Israeli contraventions of international law, and all other forms of support for the occupation of Palestinian land.” There’s clearly dissent within the group. Still, those who disagreed with endorsing or expressed reservations nonetheless affirmed a commitment to the work we’re doing together as AWC. And each meeting about possible actions has been larger than the last. This is encouraging. We have the collective potential to continue building connections across disagreement. It gives us opportunities to move forward as a group, leaving no one behind.
We asked ourselves: what is our threshold, standard, or quorum for deciding to endorse and share? We recalled the only other statement this group has issued: an open letter on police brutality by the AWE Fund organizing committee. That process began with a member of the group, Anna Clutterbuck-Cook, drafting the letter and circulating it for the group to discuss. At the time, our conversation circled around whether and how a statement could be meaningful, much less one coming from our then somewhat smaller organizing crew. The process helped us coalesce as a group. The situation today is somewhat different: there are more subscribers to the organizers’ email list, but a much smaller subsection regularly attend meetings. It can be more difficult to know where everyone stands regarding our group’s discussions. However, at the December 15 meeting we agreed that the precedent of a statement on archives and Black lives makes it clear that wider political and humanitarian matters are of concern to AWC. And, we knew of many statements coming out of unions and other labor organizations to whom Gaza is pertinent.
As a group, our process has been full of hesitation and confusion, and we acknowledge the complexity of having these discussions. Those of us who have participated in these discussions at least find it pretty straightforward to express support for all people harmed by the conflict, and not diminish their suffering. So with this process as a beginning, we will work through how to balance advocating for systemic support related to domestic archival labor issues with advocating for support for our international colleagues caught in the midst of global conflicts. Anything we do to stand with Palestinians now informs our current and future work. None of this work happens in isolation. Our advocacy as AWEF/AWC has largely focused on U.S. workers and contexts, and it’s past time that we engage with the international implications of our work and build solidarity beyond borders. As U.S.-based archival workers who belong to many diasporas – including the capital-D Diaspora in the original sense, as Jews – we are largely settlers that participate in systems that uphold ongoing colonization here and around the world. That reality won’t dissolve with a statement. However, we can’t blithely claim to “decolonize archives” without critically thinking and understanding our positions in the world.
Archival Workers Emergency Fund 