SRRT (Social Responsibilities Round Table)

 View Only
last person joined: 12 hours ago 

The Social Responsibilities Round Table works to make ALA more democratic and to establish progressive priorities not only for the Association, but also for the entire profession. Concern for human and economic rights was an important element in the founding of SRRT and remains an urgent concern today. SRRT believes that libraries and librarians must recognize and help solve social problems and inequities in order to carry out their mandate to work for the common good and bolster democracy.

Learn more about SRRT on the ALA website.

Back to discussions
Expand all | Collapse all

Regarding the SRRT Action Council meetings at ALA Annual in Philadelphia

  • 1.  Regarding the SRRT Action Council meetings at ALA Annual in Philadelphia

    Posted Jul 06, 2025 08:44 AM

    Just to provide some necessary context for the current discussion about what happened at the SRRT Action Council meetings at ALA Annual in Philadelphia, attached are two documents. The first is the revised draft proposed by SRRT International Responsibilities Task Force (IRTF) members to the Resolution Reaffirming ALA's Support of the Right to Protest as a Necessity in a Free Society, in response to which the SRRT Councillor chose to withdraw the resolution entirely. The second is the Resolution in Defense of Peaceful Antiwar Protest and Academic Freedom introduced by IRTF members in June 2024 and again in January 2025, which to be clear was not passed and forwarded to ALA Council by SRRT Action Council. I've redlined the Resolved clause to indicate that.

    I probably shouldn't be, but I'm still surprised at the way things went downhill so quickly at the Action Council meetings in Philly. What I expected was that IRTF would propose some amendments to the resolution proposed by the SRRT Councillor (see first attached document), and then Action Council would reject the amendments, pass the resolution as written and vote to forward it to ALA Council. I seriously doubt anyone in IRTF would have objected to such an outcome. I certainly would not have objected, because it's exactly what I expected to happen. What I didn't expect was that the SRRT Councillor would unilaterally withdraw the resolution, and that IRTF members would actually be accused of attempting a 'coup'! Why is principled disagreement, no matter how reasonably expressed, seen as divisive, disrespectful, aggressive, threatening? Is it because IRTF's focus on issues such as Palestine, war and imperialism are seen as somehow undermining SRRT's respectable reputation in ALA?

    If IRTF members weren't following the correct procedure or rules of order, as some have asserted, then the SRRT Coordinator should have simply informed us of that fact and instructed the group on the correct way to proceed. A discussion would then have taken place, followed by a vote by Action Council, which, to reiterate, I think would have almost certainly gone in favor of the SRRT Councillor's version. How difficult or time-consuming would that have been?



    ------------------------------
    Mark Hudson
    Co-chair, SRRT International Responsibilities Task Force (IRTF)
    Pittsburgh, PA, US
    ------------------------------