The final ratification of the Greek Relationship Statement was supposed to be a hallmark moment of the new greek system at RPI, where it now appears little more than a hollow document filled with potential, but brimming with distrust. The decade-long work of members of the Alumni Inter-Greek Council and of several different IFC boards provided the Institute with a living document that had the capability to change and grow as the time itself changed the world around us. Disregarding it out of hand is as needlessly wasteful of the time put into its creation as it is of the destruction of its embodied potential. We had reached a watershed moment where the entire greek system was unified behind the administration—a moment that I fear may not soon be repeated.

In the last week, there has been a systematic and unacceptable level of disregard for our Institute’s historical tradition of student input and representation. While regardless of the changes to the greek system at RPI being proposed, the thought that the IFC, AIGC, Grand Marshal, and the Student Senate were completely disregarded, ignored, and misled is entirely reprehensible.

Our greek system has so many stakeholders that we have not one, but three bodies charged with managing the complex relationship between alumni, students, and administrators. The Panhellenic and Interfraternity Councils provide a way to enfranchise students in the difficult decisions and regulations that are necessary to maintain a safe and sane environment for our fraternities and sororities, while the AIGC is an instrumental body used to bring together the alumni that act as internal guardians of the very organizations that thousands of our alumni feel need to be guided and nourished.

We enjoy a robust and responsive system of student representation in regards to the affairs of the Institute. This is a system that has evolved, adapted, and existed continuously over almost a century and a half of our Institute’s existence. It would be irresponsible to ignore such a fertile ground for discussion and enfranchisement.

What is needed now is not fiat pronouncements and recreational messages of disillusionment, but for these proposals to be discussed anew. They should be brought forth before the bodies that were chartered and charged with the safekeeping of our greek houses, and acted on in accordance with our written regulations, our storied tradition, and simple common sense.

Mike Dillon