[Linganth] Mime-Version: 1.0

[Dr. Mark Peterson]

Dear all,

The January SLA column in the Anthropology Newsletter is due Monday, Nov.
22.  For this column, I am interested in hearing from SLA members who have
brief, substantive comments to make on the recent decision by AAA to shift
the meetings to Dec. in Atlanta, especially insofar as these relate to SLA
as a body, or to ous discipline more generally.  I am particularly
interesting in hearing from those who have chosen to hold linguistics
sessions in California in spite of AAA, and perhaps hearing how things
went.  Comments I receive this week (i.e. by Sunday Nov. 21st) can be
included in my column for the Jan issue of Anthropology Newsletter.

Please e-mail me directly at petersm2 at muohio.edu.
Or call me Monday in my office (513) 529-5018  9:00-3:15 EST

In addition, the AN has decided to run a series of commentaries on the
topic "What is and should be the role of the AAA?" inspired by the SF
debacle.    A precis of the points of discussion can be found
below.  Commentaries of not more than 800 words can be sent to Stacy
Lathrop <slathrop at aaanet.org> by Dec. 6 for inclusion in the Jan and/or Feb
issue(s).

The AAA Executive Board's decision to switch the association's contract to
hold our meeting in San Francisco this year with our contract to hold our
meeting in Atlanta in 2006, in response to the labor contract standoff
between the San Francisco Hilton Hotel and Local 2 of Unite Here, resulted
in numerous comments, many of them conflicting.  Nearly all of these
comments deal with questions about the role of the AAA in relation to the
profession of anthropology and the larger social word in which it is
engaged.  Many of them deal specifically about ethics and
governance.  Although people may take different stances, most seem to be
addressing:

	*	How should AAA interpret its mission statement and long range plan in
going about its activities?  Are our mission statement and long-range plan
still relevant in the world today, or do we need to revisit them?
	*	To whom is the AAA, and its governing body, responsible?
	*	If the membership is divided in its opinions about a matter, how should
the AAA responsibly decide a course of action?
	*	What is the best way of communicating these processes and actions?

So that we might discuss these shared concerns with an eye towards shaping
our association for the future, and so that we might learn from our
different perspectives and positions in thinking about them, Anthropology
News invites readers to begin examining the assumptions and perspectives
guiding particular claims about the role of the AAA and its responsibility
to its members and the public.

	*	What is the role of the AAA as a scholarly association, in terms of its
binding bylaws and the expectations of its members?  How do we understand
it as an organization?  What do we expect it to do as a member
organization?  Some have made statements that the association must
change.  Do you agree?  If so, how and why should it do this?
	*	What ethical precepts do and should guide our views about the
association and its actions?  What legal obligations must be
considered?  What other material realities ought to be considered, such as
limited resources?
	*	When these ethical precepts, legal obligations and material realities
conflict, how should association leaders work through all the relevant
factors to make decisions having significant consequences for all
interested parties?
	*	In designing ethics and public resolutions and statements, should the
AAA solely take a rule-oriented approach or one that recognizes that there
can be both connections and disconnects between rules and practices.  How
might the AAA recognize the complexity of ethical and political issues, and
the value of looking at social practices in particular contexts, when
making decisions?
	*	What is and should be the relationship between anthropological research
and advocacy?