On January 16, 1919, the 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, prohibiting the manufacturing, sale or transportation of alcohol. What is perhaps even more interesting though, and oft overlooked, is the legislation passed by Congress ten months later. The Volstead Act was meant to enforce the new policy of prohibition, but it failed. Because of large cities disinterest in enforcement and an understaffed federal service, the policy accidentally created a black market for alcohol, backroom drinking, and unregulated sale and consumption.
The new social policies enacted at Union can draw some valid comparisons. While well intentioned, the administrative policy barring freshmen from the social scene on campus has had more negative effects than positive ones. It isolates freshmen from the larger community, which is both morally objectionable and physically dangerous. Also, it further solidifies the taboo stereotype that Greek Life has unfairly been branded with, and it does little to quell the real problems occurring all around us.
In May 2012, the Minerva Council met to discuss how the seven houses on campus would handle, and be affected by, the new social policies. With freshmen barred from all Greek parties for five weeks, Minervas saw an opportunity to reinvigorate their social image. Last spring, Golub House, which has a long history of reaching out to the Greek community, began planning a formal social event with Gamma Phi Beta. Kappa Alpha soon joined on. While Minerva houses often do hold social events with alcohol, there is greater oversight, more regulation and more enforcement than other parties on campus. It would be a way for first year students to enter the social scene at Union, interact with the upperclassmen they’ve been wrongly segregated from, and introduce them to both Minerva and Greek life.
Let’s be clear, freshmen would still not have ready access to alcohol. With social hosts, I.D. checks at the door, wrist banding and campus safety in and out, this is perhaps the most regulated environment one could create. And yet freshmen were barred from even entering simply because it was a Greek co-sponsored event.
The absurd notion that first years have neither the maturity nor capability to look at, think about, or be in the presence of alcohol is naïve and prehistoric. It wrongly eliminates first year students from our community, confining them to their own dormitories and punishing them for a wrong they never committed.
The policy also wrongly punishes Greek Life. Are there problems on campus? Of course there are—it’s obvious. But is it a problem with the system or isolated incidents that can be avoided? I would argue for the latter. Under this new policy, “alcohol” and “Greek Life” become dirty words, associated with a taboo that ignores our college’s history and further isolates a key component of our community.
An effective policy must focus on personal responsibility and individual self-discipline. Stupid mistakes occur because of stupid decisions. But it has always been the philosophy of the Union administration to discipline through education, not nascent punishment. It is a worthy philosophy that has been abandoned under this new policy.
In the wake of the new Honor Code policy, which stresses trust between the student body, faculty and administration, the social policy is something beyond hypocrisy. There is no trust, no understanding and no discussion. It is an “us” and “them” mentality that will only divide and foster a continuing, lingering resentment for hierarchy, rules and responsibility.
During the 1987 U.S. Senate confirmation hearings of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, Senator Ted Kennedy described what America would look like under Bork’s policies. In the “Bork’s America” speech, Kennedy accused Judge Bork of being stuck in a Neanderthal past, noting:
“Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters…and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy.”
Well, in this administration’s Union College, first year students are forced into back-room drinking, Greek Life is segregated and further ostracized from our community, the philosophy of personal responsibility, at the heart of our community, is abandoned in exchange for harsh communal punishment, and the problems that persist continue to have unintended consequences.
Loading ...
Well said! Thanks for writing a great article!
Awesome article, I really hope that Dean Leavitt & Co. reads this and takes your points into consideration. You are quite right that they have missed the mark on pinpointing the cause of irresponsible drinking habits among Union students.
Mr. DAngelo,
I agree with doing away with these rules especially when an honor code exists. Virtue is probably the most important thing a person can keep intact, and when an organization will trust in virtue, no rules are required. A pledge on ones honor carries significant weight; however, it implies a question: What is to happen to students who violate the honor code, once? twice? Do you think that the penalty should be complete separation from the organization because violation of such a code indicates that person cannot be trusted?
Up to the Kennedy quote I was on-board, but this part of your note is incoherent, especially when you espouse entrusting the individual on his virtue alone. So here you go, quoting one of the worst offenders of virtue in the world to justify your position? How do you reconcile that? Additionally, your selection of this quote besmirches Judge Bork, a man with virtue above most others. Amazing!!! Kennedy is a man who by his own admission was involved in the death of a woman, and did not go for help until almost a dozen hours later. Comparing this guy with Bork, an originalist who advocated judicial restraint in an atmosphere of judicial activism. Correlate the word restraint with George Washington; it gives a good picture of what virtue is and why men like Judge Bork are the standard to which we need to strive not the people we need to move away from.
Unfortunately you went off the rails when you adapted that quote to the situation at Union; it makes this note pedestrian at best.
A great article except that that I do not think you portray Minerva events with alcohol accurately. I was in a Greek house and I was also on the council of one of the Minervas for three years. I social hosted dozens of events at the Minerva because I was social host trained. I also attended social events at all of the other Minervas and I can confidently say that Greek parties are safer and better regulated.
At Minerva events campus safety would only come by before the party began and with one fridge in the kitchen and one in a closet, it was very easy to hide most of the alcohol from them. Campus safety rarely came through during the event and if they did they did not look at wristbands. If they happened to look at wristbands, however, no one would have gotten in trouble because just about everyone received a wristband. The Minerva simply put up a sign saying that the New York Law states that no one under 21 could consume alcohol and then we would give wristbands out to everyone. You might think that this was irresponsible of us, but all of the houses did it and no one ever got in trouble. The administration automatically thinks that since it is a Minerva event, it is run well and it is safe.
I have seen more freshman consume greater amounts of alcohol at Minerva events than at Greek events because the server is less likely to get themselves or a friend in trouble. The school will not shut down a Minerva or expel the head of the council if something goes wrong. In a Greek house, however, people are more cautious about who they serve to, especially if the person asking for a beer is underage and looks intoxicated. If someone underage is caught intoxicated out on campus and says that they were at a Greek house, that house could go on probation, and even worse could lose its housing. This is a strong incentive for Greek members to run a safe party. There is no incentive like this for Minerva council members to run a safe party. Greek members have much stronger bonds to their Greek house than Minerva council members have to their Minerva houses. I have been in both, know others in both and know others in just one of the two. There is no comparison to a Greek member’s attention to detail and safety at a Greek social event than at a Minerva social event.
The reason why this comment might be surprising to some reading this is because Union primarily reports on the negatives of Greek life. They do not note that the reason someone was transported from a Greek party was because a freshman took 10 shots in 30 minutes and a responsible brother at the party called campus safety. They do not talk about Greek houses raising thousands of dollars a term or volunteering hours of their time for philanthropy. They do not talk about the high GPA of Greeks. They talk about Greek life portrayed in Animal House. Minervas, on the other hand, are provided with $30,000 a year to put on events, many of which unofficially become “closed” events where only friends of the event creator are invited or they put on social events which were described above.