World history surveys to freshman, i tell the students, most of whom are there only because the university requires them, that the value of history lies in its ability for us to see the past in such a way that we can reimagine the present and the future. That perspective can allow us to create a better world than the one in which we now inhabit. This is the gift our speaker, Michael Kazin brings to us tonight and has shared with the readers of many of his books, such as his biography of William Jennings bryan, his account of the political place of the left in American History, and most relatively to this conference, his recent study of peace activists in world war i. He is a professor of history at Georgetown University and the editor of descent magazine. He writes for the new york times, foreign affairs, the nation, and the daily beast. He has written many books and lectured in the United States, europe, and japan and we are lucky to have him here this evening. Please join me in extending a welcome to professor Michael Kazin. [applause] thanks for that lovely introduction. I was going to ask us to applaud andrew and all the people who helped him for putting together this inspiring conference. [applause] i have to say that the whole staff here this is the best run museum i have ever been to and that includes the National Museum of American History. It is a great institution. I often say we always face the problem americans do not care that much about world war i but anybody who comes to this museum and walks out not caring had their eyes closed or were looking at their phone the whole time. Thanks to this great museum. Andrew asked me to use what i learned about the movement to oppose world war i in writing my book to reflect on opposition to war today. I would also like to do a couple of other things. I will get to that. Knowing that i was going to be speaking to a room full of people who studied world war i a lot longer than i have, i wanted to pose an uninspiring question about not just the history of world war i but the history of Peace Movements generally in American History. I wanted to reflect on the legacy of the movement that opposed preparedness in the great war and the decades that followed it and i will get to the question of what the Antiwar Movement looks like in the present. My question is a troubling one why are the voices of war opponents so muted . The title of this conference was well chosen. For most americans, perhaps most europeans, why do antimilitarists received so receive so little attention in narratives about Armed Conflicts and among u. S. Historians generally . That is true for world war i, this museum notwithstanding. Think about the National Museum of American History in washington. Maybe people have seen the exhibit they have on americans at war at the museum of American History. They have a small section devoted to world war i. They have a website based on it as well. As far as i can see, there is almost nothing on the movement to oppose that war. The images i got on the website are typical images. The famous flag poster, the song about the Woman Working as a nurse, combat photos, African American soldiers, etc. Photos of prowar images generally. Hardly anything about the movement that was so important giving americans an alternative way of thinking about the war and doing a lot to stall those who wanted the u. S. To get into the war and then continuing in opposing the war after the u. S. Declares war in april, 1917. The basic facts about opposition that are known to scholars are unknown to most people. How large draft resistance was, for example. How many people outside this room know there were 350,000 americans who resisted conscription . There were 3 million americans who never registered for draft. How many know it was the Womens Movement that began the Antiwar Movement . Beginning from the womens march down 5th avenue in 1914. How many know that votes for antiwar candidates increased in the election of 1917 . Including the labor lawyer and socialist of new york when he got almost a quarter of the vote in a three man race on an antidraft platform . How may people know the origins of modern Civil Liberties jurisprudence are there, with the beginning of the aclu and of course, with the cases out of the war, the abrams case and others, which Oliver Wendell holmes made his famous decision. There is also a good deal of neglect about the most successful Peace Movement in history that against the war in indochina. Take the 18 hour pbs documentary i heard a sigh 18 hours, produced by ken burns. The treatment of the war itself is splendid and negative. They made clear the u. S. Was doomed to lose that war and deserved to lose. When they turned to the subject of those who made the same arguments about the war itself, they fall back on caricatures about millions of people, protesters, screaming at gis and spitting on them. About how most americans oppose the war, routing for a communist victory. They almost entirely neglect the efforts by groups like Vietnam Veterans against the war to get people who were serving and had served in the military to oppose the mission they were called upon to serve. They neglect for the most part the americans who put almost all their effort on the politicians their emphasis on the politicians who were taking america to war as opposed to looking at the soldiers as enemies, which hardly anybody did. Perhaps we should not blame filmmakers for their flaws. The United States has been at war for most of its history. There have been organized opposition in each major conflict to the present. The scholarship in Antiwar Movements is less known as compared to that of other social movements in American History, such as those are black freedom, for black freedom, labor organizing, and the grassroots left and right. Why . That is the question i want to start with. Why is the movement we know so neglected by most scholars and textbooks as well. Some is due to the reverence for the military which has always run deep in u. S. History. 10 of the 40 elected u. S. President s were elected in part because of their military exploits. The opponents of the other progressive movements i mentioned i include the movement for lgbtq writes are widely viewed as racist, homophobic. Neither antiwar activists nor the scholars who study them want to view ordinary combatants as the culprits behind war even though no war can be fought without them. It is difficult to respect their service but also explaining how and why americans tried to stop them from carrying out their mission. There is ambiguity there. To a certain degree, it muddies the water for people appreciating scholarship. Another reason for the neglect is they are part of a history of war and diplomacy. It has long been dominated by scholars, mostly men. Understanding why powerful men made decisions to prepare for and negotiate an end to Armed Conflicts. The citizens and noncitizens seem marginal to that greater history. The kind of social changes or cause or at least accelerate, also play a role. Womens suffrage triumphed in in part as a result of the role women played in world war i supporting it, not opposing it. The black Freedom Movement got a huge boost in numbers as a result of world war ii. The naacp increased its membership by 1000 in world war ii. Figures like this guy, the first black man to play major league baseball, jackie robinson, was part of the black Freedom Movement during the war. He was courtmartialed during the war for refusing to get to the back of the bus at fort hood, texas, a segregated state. He was found innocent because it was on a federal bus, not a state bus. If he had not been found innocent, he would not have been the first black man to play major league baseball. There is a recent book called the great leveler has anybody read that . It is fascinating but troubling. He argues that wars are the great leveler in human history. They sometimes promote a gala and a gala terrorists in and a gala terrien spirit which helps narrow the income gap. Sometimes they just destroying everything in their path, including the property of the rich and the poor and that helps level things. There is a way in which war has been responsible for Movement Towards a more egalitarian social policy in history. The very nature of Antiwar Movements plays a part in this neglect as well. Antiwar movements are not like other collective attempts to change society. In contrast to those who seek rights and a measure of power for women or workers or people of color, peace seekers have no natural constituency, unless it is everybody. That is not the same thing as having a specific constituency demographically. Neither can their movement cannot grow slowly, taking decades to convince people and to enact laws and embody that new perspective, the way other movements can. The black freedom Movement Began during slavery and is still going on but had take try amps but had try amps during reconstruction and in the 60s. A massive effort to stop a war that is already raging has to grow quickly or will have little or no influence. That movement has to lure talented activists away from other political commitments. Every new war requires activists to create a new movement and to define partners for a new coalition who might be capable of ending it. Thereve always been pacifists in the United States and weve heard papers today and we will hear more tomorrow about the peace churches. A wonderful panel today. During periods of peace, endure on the margins, unknown to most of their fellow citizens. The americans who fought a war against war in 1914 until the declaration of war almost three years later, managed juice or mount these obstacles. Their coalition was ideologically broad. It was tripartisan because the socialist party was a large but minor party at the time. It operated inside but outside congress. It used a range of tactics, like a huge war against war exhibit in new york city that featured cartoons, a scale model of a stegasaurus with the caption that he went extinct because he had armored plate but no brains. Hundreds of thousands visited that in new york. As most of you know, the most important tactic was to try to get congress and the president to authorize a referendum. They were confident they would win that if it had been held. They were unable to convince the president and congress to keep the nation at peace. The legacy is not one of failure. They warned credibly about the consequences of American Intervention and were transformed by the 20s from traders into something akin to profits. Prophets. A democrat from missouri was one of the six senators to vote against the declaration of war said this, i will not vote for war because if we go into a, we will never again have the same republic. This can be read in many ways. It can be read as a statement it was clearly accurate whether the old republic was good or not. The antimilitarist had made a mighty attempt to prevent the establishment of a political order most americans take for granted. That is a state equipped to fight numerous wars abroad will while keeping a close watch on activities of its citizens at home. The surveillance state call it what you will. The identity of the nations enemies has changed often. Stated Foreign Policy has nearly always remained the same to create a world made safe for democracy. Donald trump has abandoned that rhetoric only to replace it with a different kind of idealism. He aims to put America First and to force every other country to surrender to its whims. As soon as the great war ended, its foes in the United States did begin to experience a kind of redemption. Former allies refuse to pay back war loans. European nations fell into bitter quarrels and strife. Americans increasingly viewed peace advocates as more prophetic and disloyal. A senator from wisconsin was almost expelled from the senate for his opposition to the war during the war. He was reelected to the senate by the largest majority in wisconsin history. The Womens International league for peace and freedom and the success of the womens peace party gave thousands of members through the 20s both in the United States and abroad with a radical platform. They called for pacifism and opposition to imperialism. In 1922, jane adams asked is not war a contradiction in terms . However often it was repeated. Most americans would have responded in the affirmative. 1931, as most of you know, jane adams won the Nobel Peace Prize. The committee in norway saluted her for being right all along. The quote from the statement she held fast to the ideal of peace even through the hours when other considerations obscured it from her compatriots and drove them into the conflict. You could not get a much clearer statement about how she was right. The new york times, which was not as liberal a paper as it is today, had excoriated adams for her pacifism, now hope to turn now hoped her wartime prophecy of International Cooperation might be coming true. At the time, most americans looked back at the conflict with regret. The number of war commemorations dwindled rapidly. The construction of the tomb of the unknown soldier at Arlington Cemetery was delayed for five years, as officials argued about whether it symbolized war or peace. This was shown by somebody else earlier. This was showing the american delegation to the hague in 1950. 1915. Jane adams is there, first from your left. 1929 the senate approved, one dissenting vote, the treaty to outlaw war. 60 nations signed it. 1934, a Senate Special committee began to investigate the charge that munitions producers had dragged the nation into the great war. They never uncovered a conspiracy. Most conspiracy theories never pan out but the wellpublicized hearings persuaded Many Americans that war is not a matter of National Honor but a matter of profit for the few. Popular history has written at the same time of u. S. Intervention as well, even though they did not always agree with economic analysis. Revisionist accounts of the great war sold well. Charles beard wrote one. The best selling was the road to war. High up on the bestseller list for many months. Popular opinion was both helping these books to sell well and was reflected by their point of view. In 1937, the gallup pole found 70 of american respondents believed it was a mistake to fight the great war. Each of the previous years, congress by overwhelming majorities, had voted for neutrality acts, which essentially took the same act the Peace Coalition had demanded 20 years before. An embargo on selling arms. And a prohibition on americans traveling on ships of belligerent nations. The war had not begun yet. 1937, lawmakers slapped a ban on u. S. Vessels claiming caring carrying people people of any nation at war. In other opinion polls, large majority of americans supported a constitutional amendment that would require a referendum for the u. S. To go to war, sponsored by this man. Franklin roosevelt was so afraid this amendment would pass he was opposed to this kind of restriction on war powers the Democratic Leaders in congress, pushed by roosevelt, make sure made sure the amendment never got to the floor to be debated because they were afraid if it got debated, americans might support it and be enacted. Robert had written to his soninlaw i might not live to see my own vindication but you will. He died in 1925. 20 years after the war ended, he seemed correct. Another war happened. Most politicians who it made these antiwar arguments repudiated that opinion after the attack on pearl harbor. Great war revisionism fell out of favor and it appeared unpatriotic. In the wake of the holocaust and nazi andt of the japanese empires, jane adams and her antimilitarist seemed naive, not prophetic. In the Second World War, most americans agreed the u. S. And its allies did help rescue civilization. I went to high school in the middle of the 1960s and my High School History ap textbook was written by samuel eliot morrison, a leading historian of that time. This is how he wrote about wilsons decision to go to war they compared it to abraham lincolns decision to try to reinforce the garrison at warts sumpter fort sumter. They said president wilson felt the lesser evil was for america to join the conflict to try to direct the peace that must eventually come into channels that would justify the sacrifice. They concluded few would doubt he was right. Then came another war. The debacle in indochina. In justifying intervention against the enemy force, Lyndon Baines johnson sounded like woodrow wilson, calling for peace without victory, calling for a declaration of war. In a speech he gave at johns we wantin 1965, he said a piece without conquest in vietnam. He said there is no difference. We fight because we must fight. If we are going to live in a world where every country can shape its own destiny and only such a world, will our own freedom beat secure. Over 500,000 troops and millions of bombs failed to vanquish an enemy, those phrases sounded hollow, if not ludicrous. Left ine response, pacifists built in other larger movement, which, in many ways, echoed the movement in world war i. Sorry i messed up my slides. It is always good to look at rankin. I got a little clumsy in my sequences. Prominent, now elderly men and women who had opposed intervention in the great war were still bound to the vietnam war. They delivered rousing speeches against indochina. They have written a wonderful book. Isthe age of 87, rankin opposed to war. She led an autonomous brigade of 3000 women to the Capitol Building in d. C. , where they delivered a petition against the ruthless slaughter in vietnam. The speaker of the house, john mccormack, a veteran of world war i. 50 years seemed very short in that moment. In another echo of the war, the Antiwar Movement during the great war, there was a popular soul record that shot to number one on the billboard chart. War . The question what is it good for . Adams would have applauded the answer. It was the destruction of innocent lives, when sons go off to fight and lose their lives. What is it good for . Absolutely nothing. Echoes of world war i can be heard in soldiers account of world war i vietnam. Finish aears time he spenthe as a marine in the country. He studied the memoirs of world war i. He says that the form felt right. Vietnamd to me, resembled the First World War in its poll pointlessness, its ultimate disillusionment. We still live in the shadow of the vietnam war, to welcome the 50 years later, as americans during the vietnam war lived in the shadow of world war i. One of the changes it helped bring about was the reluctance tothe part of most americans hurl what remained the worlds most potent military machine into what are allegedly world wars. They wanted to prevent new wars. Long before those interventions stretched to a second decade and now the one in afghanistan looks like it will stretch to a third and fourth decade americans mostly have grown whilel about the mission, honoring the men and women in uniform still struggling to complete it. Again, to bring why is therew is, asrge Antiwar Movement there clearly was during world war i, clearly was during the vietnam war . Why is that . Last Antiwar Movement i know about took place two and half years ago. It attracted about 500 demonstrators. Received no coverage at all in the mainstream media. This . Y is significantious and one, the nature of the enemys states nited enemies that be nice is is been fighting since fall of 2001. I think all americans sensibly regard these groups. Most antiwar groups have shifted the focus to the innocent victims of the intervention. Compared to vietnam, this is a different movement. It did not come out of nowhere. We used to always know this. There are all of these antecedents. Many of the most talented and committed activists during the vietnam war came from other movements on the broad left. Feminism came a little bit later. They learned for the vietnam war came into sight to define their. Olitics they were optimistic internationalists. sere were slogans like snic slocum, one man, one vote. Slogan, one man, no vote. The link between the black Freedom Movement and the Antiwar Movement was very tight and close. Excuse me . Im sorry i cant, yes, i know. I know. He tried first unsuccessfully. Activists and antiwar activists, they were passionate internationalists, even if they did not support the viet cong. Felt thate majority this peasant army was at least to be sympathized with. It is also true most of the most important movements today object to the military funded budget. Principle. Ntiwar in that theyat the were fighting are hardly groups that support gender equality or anything else that those in progressive movements hold dear. Wants to cutmatter down the military budget. , stopping people from going to iraq is not one of their priorities. According to antiwar activists, theres a very difficult obstacle. You americans oppose the current armed to mentions abroad. One reason is why perhaps few time inives spend their the cause today. The movementpart, against the war in vietnam was the left alone. , he is in many ways just as articulate and opponent of these surveillance state as anyone on the left is. You probably know the website antiwar. Com. It publishes articles from the left, right, and center. That can be a plus. But it is difficult to define what your community is if you are in the Antiwar Movement, i think. He speaks out against nsa surveillance. Im notnald trump saying a good word for donald trump your. And putting him in context. Donald trump sometimes echoes the views of people like rand paul. Er all, they say americans America First. I can be taken different ways. Back and say, lets just worry about cultivating our own garden. That is not, of course, how he is governing at all. But that is the slogan. I think that is part of the reason he appeals to people. Mostere is one of the eloquent foes of the war, as most of you know. He game he gave the same americansn that many opposed the war. He said in the great essay a war diary that america has lost its isolation. Smugdoes not mean a retreat from the war. The belief that the truth in us can be only contaminated by contact. It means the promise of American Life has not yet been achieved, and until it is, there is. Othing for us to do so, we honor the troops over and over again. Public venues, ballparks. Even though we are dubious at best about the wars we are. Ighting antiwar activists struggle with this contradiction. The public is skeptical about military intervention, but it is not seen as a threat to all they hold dear. With not my own words, but the words of the philosopher william james, who i began and ended my book with and got the title of my book as many of you might know from thereilliam james is a complex essay, the moral equivalent of war, which i will assume you have already. The wart line goes, against war will be no holiday excursion or party. You do not know the half of it. Writing in 1910 before he died, james could not have foreseen the horrors the next century of war would produce, but he examined how organized killing could take on the lore of service to ones fellow citizens, even humanity as a whole. But james felt it was even more difficult for civilized man, as he put it, to justify it. Pretext must be found, attributing them solely to the enemy. Reason, a waynd to find agreement. This is a true progressive mind at work here. There is nothing that honest men and he should have added women cannot due to study a problem and figure out how to work their way through it. I wish we could live like that. I wish we did live like that. But it had little bearing on how nations then and now go to war. Most of the wars the united are no lessought wars of choice than world war i. The conflict in mexico in the 1940s, the war with spain in 1988, the landgrab, the police the ordealhe 1950s, of the 1960s and 70s, and the recent invasions and occupations of afghanistan and iraq were all wars of choice. Or, one could argue in the case choice. , the only the Second World War stands conflict. Inevitable the outsized place that the Second World War plays in our historical memory gives us the merit of of military triumph without a cautionary narrative to limit it. William james would have appreciated, i think, the idea particularly war, bringsis the biggest an aspect to soldiering that no one really enjoys. The professional military class refused to admit for moment that were might be a transitory phenomena in. A transitory phenomena and in social evolution. That not remains true many people consider that possibility. , we might learn more, and i think, tell our , our fellow citizens more about the movement we are focusing on at this conference. The movement that fought so. Ealously against the great war they were pacifists and socialists and democrats and republicans, black and white, protestants, catholics, jus, eastern orthodox. They had no illusions they can achieve their purpose by easterns, jews, orthodox. They had no illusions they could achieve their purpose by staying isolated in the world. They believed that a durable peace depended on the United States forging a relationship with other nations. Foraps we should thank them their service, too. Sadly the moral equivalent of war is more elusive now then when james was playing. It is a grim judgment and a short judgment. James wrote, history is a path of blood history is a bath of blood. Only were we recognize that an arm ourselves can we be able someday to change it. Thank you. [applause] again, ladies and gentlemen, Michael Kazin is going to take questions. There are some lovely and well let microphones on either side of these stage. I have heard some really delightful discussions. I know that there might be wonderful questions at hand. Thank you for a very fine talk. Lots of good and useful stuff. I might suggest that you im not sure i can hear you. Closer to the mic. You for a fine talk. If you might consider adding to the list of very fine questions you started with, consider who ended the draft. Richard nixon. And he did so cynically, predicting and knowing the Antiwar Movement against his work would stop. Within months, demonstrations disappeared and it wasnt just students. It was their parents, largely middleclass, who had real clout with congress, who stopped route who stopped lobbying. True therertainly would be more resistance if there were a draft today. Make in some degree, by that time allamerican combat troops were coming home. P. O. W. Troops like john mccain. Antiwar movement would have decried anyway. And George Mcgovern lost the election in 1972. He was the antiwar candidate. About now, first of all, it would be impossible, given how our culture has developed to have a draft now. Reason. Ink there is a was resistancere to the mexican war. There was no draft then. Tore was a lot of resistance sending americans to the war in europe. Of thehe draft, the lack draft is one element that has to be put into the equation. I think it is only one. Of course, historians know is that counter factual question. Once you change one thing, you change everything else. But the fact that most americans not to say is a hyper libertarian way of approaching obligations to the maybe they like the opposition to the draft, they do not like the opposition to other things. This morning, we heard very powerfully from quakers that their opposition was to conscription per se. I appreciate that as a value. On the other hand, many people of s room are in favor of course. Zin the volunteer army. They volunteer because it is a job. I have had arguments with people about this. Most of the people in the military today, they join for a combination of reasons. They wanted to save it from a mortal enemy. It came back into popularity. I think it is important for us a think and there was great paper at one of the notions about soldiers talking about their experiences, there are studies of why people go into the military. It is more mixed. Its not just that they do not have anything going on in their lives and they want a steady job and health care. The next question will come from the other side of the auditorium. Thank you, michael. What is your opinion is there to asko channel gandhi, all of the people in the world to set aside time to ask themselves how they can be agents of peace and change and take responsibility for nuclear weapons, for militarism, it environmental crises, all of those things in the form of strike to askwn the people of the world to channel Peak Solutions . Professor kazin most people get active because it affects the lives of themselves, someone they know. That is white Antiwar Movements have to get going with every war. By their racial categories they are put into. Or women because of their gender, etc. Forms of oppression, forms of inequality, outrage that they face every day. Unfortunately, you would have to get people to already care about the issue. In some ways, it has to do with climate change, i hate to say. Its a very tough issue to get a mass of people behind. At least they can see the damage that is done by hurricanes in miami beach being flooded, this kind of thing. Just not sure that peoplehink should stop and start and stop and start depending on the crisis and the issue. I think people know weapons can eradicate all life and militarism steals from the hungry i agree. Kazin all i can do is analyze why they are not. I share your feelings. The First Political act i ever did was, i went to a meeting in Madison Square garden in new bomb rally. The dr. Spock was the main speaker. Cnd button i wore a throughout high school and my friends called me a commie for doing it. You have answered why there is not as much of an Antiwar Movement presently. Im wondering whether you can comment on whether the obama victory in 2008 in some fashion is a culmination of the Antiwar Movement . Theame to prominence in 2004 convention, but he came to prominence as an antiwar spokesperson. I think he won the primaries primarily because of his votes vote inote opposed, her favor. That raises the other question, once we claim victory, how do we presidency . K professorazin that thats a very good point. I think john kerry also want if you missed it, he just said that he voted for the war. Obama did notn have a chance to vote for the war. He was not a congressman. People started pushing. Support went on and, of course, now we have more troops in afghanistan. , you need anally outside strategy. Outsideot depend on the strategy. At the same time, you cannot limit the military budget. , what people cared about was the great recession, right . They cared about whether the aca was going to pass or not. The wars were there, but they were way down on the priorities of most people, even progressives. There was success in the Antiwar Movement, but i think the fact that the american troop strength has gone down is important in a way, but there is no fundamental questioning, i think of why has gone up around the world, why theres so many angry young people in these countries. Those in the questions that perhaps policymakers are equipped to answer. Questions we have to be responding to. The other question, the second part of the question i forget. [indiscernible] i think obama we could have an argument about this. I am more favorable to his Foreign Policy then some. Not because it was on him, but given the pressures on him, im not sure he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize i yearn to his presidency or less than a year into his presidency, but i think the opening of cuba is a major, major act, which trump is now trying to take back. I think he attempted to put the. Elationship with iran i think given what he inherited, given the military he inherited, given the fact that he has got didet reelected, i think he about as good as he could have, especially given that most americans did not care that much about what he was doing in afghanistan or iraq unless i have family there and that is part of partly the result of the draft. There were questions. I believe that michael will be here tomorrow as well . No. Essor kazin ok, dont miss your chance. Now you have it. Right now, please join me in thanking Michael Kazin. [applause] thank you. Azin [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] americane watching history tv, create hours of programming on in American History every weekend on cspan3. Follow us on twitter for information on our schedule and keep up with the latest history news. Studentcam video documentary competition is underway and students across the country are busy at work and sharing their experiences through twitter. Announcer it is not too late to enter. The deadline is january 18, 2018. We are asking students to choose a provision of the constitution and created a video illustrating why it is important to you. Our competition is open to all middle school and high school students, grades 69 612. 1000 in cash prizes will be awarded. The grand prize of 5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. For more information, go to our website, studentcam. Org. Up next on American History tv, author Erika Kuhlman talks about women and Peace Movements during world war i. She highlights the activities of the womens peace party in new york city and antiwar reporting and editorials in their. Wsletter, for lights, and talks about gender roles at the time and contrasts that with women serving in the military today. This was part of a conference hosted by the National World war i museum in kansas city, missouri. Its just over an hour. Christy good morning. Im christy snider. And years ago, when i was president of the peace history society, i was delighted to be contacted by members of the original Planning Committee for this conference. They were in the process of scheduling a symposium to be held during the 100 Year Anniversary of the United States entry into the First World War, which would focus on those who embraced peace and refuse to support the war effort. They wanted to know whether or not phs could merge our 2017 biannual conference with their