Why things will never change

To make clear what is actually happening: after the Burford fiasco in the spring of 2010, the administration quickly came to see Greek life as a liability, in terms of both safety and school reputation. This was bad for the endowment, and therefore bad for President Tilghman. It was then that she dedicated a “working group on campus social and residential life” to covertly root out Greek life at Princeton (and to do other things, but who are we kidding?). This committee would take the blame for the grossly unfair and unpopular course of action about which President Tilghman had already decided.

This working group “worked” for a full academic year. It is notable that only one member of the group was involved in Greek life, nor did the group respond favorably to multiple requests from Greek groups for more direct dialogue. Their “recommendation” was published only a couple days before Dean’s Date last May, in the hope that most students would be too bogged down with schoolwork to make any kind of fuss. Students’ efforts to resist the decision, while well organized, had little effect this past summer, as President Tilghman marched right along and “accepted” the working group’s “recommendation” in late August.

One of the administration’s powerful weapons is silence, and they wield it with gusto. Remember Professor Antonio Calvo? Last spring, President Shirley Tilghman waited two long weeks before issuing any kind of statement regarding his academic termination and subsequent suicide. Her response was the usual bureaucratic nonsense imbued with self-distancing overtures and robotic condolences. It almost didn’t work — there was a brief uproar throughout campus and across the world. But the momentum didn’t last: Shirley got away with it.

“Protest” is a word that has come up a lot lately on Internet comment boards, but this is just wishful thinking.

For one, Princeton University is not a democracy, nor does it pretend to be one. Though President Tilghman often devotes a decent amount of effort to make her decisions seem less unilateral, the truth is that she does not even need to offer any kind of diplomatic gesture. Princeton has no true system of checks and balances between students and administrators. The dynamic that truly drives University policy is the relationship between University policy decisions and the alumni-giving rate. There is no direct mechanism of, say, impeaching a powerful University figure, especially over something as apparently trivial as banning freshman rush. Sure, if enough unpopular decisions are made, then the yield of accepted students may decrease in the future — but this relationship is sluggish and unreliable.

Another reason things will never change is because there is no energizing motive. We have been duped, played, insulted — this much is clear. But how much does any of this actually matter? We are only students here for four short years, so any changes that occur during our time here are, by definition, temporary circumstances for us. Why should we care to change something that won’t affect us once we graduate? We’re too busy studying and trying to find jobs to deal with such banal matters as University policy on social life — the policies suck but are ultimately unimportant. This is at least the shortsighted view — in reality, a protest could galvanize the student body to action, creating circumstances that will make Princeton more democratic for future generations. But let’s be honest: We’re selfish, and protesting a ban on freshman rush won’t look too great on a resume.

The third reason things won’t change is because people base their opinions on the particular circumstances rather than the long-term implications. A few people have cheered on the administration’s decision to ban freshman rush because they personally dislike Greek life, but they are wantonly ignoring the fact that the administration has overstepped its boundaries by trying to dupe the student body. The reality is that pro- and anti-Greek proponents should be enraged by the recent events that have set a precedent for restrained dialogue.

Things won’t change at Princeton because the administration has no motive to appease us. We’re still young, so we have a romanticized notion of vowing never to donate money to the University after making our millions. But let’s get real: The administration will ride out this wave as it always has — by the use of gratuitous amounts of “spin.” And we’ll be donating annually before we know it. In the end, President Tilghman will have no trouble deflecting this issue. It won’t even keep her up at night.