Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
As far as purposes, they change, right? I mean, Sigma Nu was founded because our founders perceived the precursor ATO organization to be abusive of their fellow students, unaccountable to anyone, and just generally perpetrating a reign of terror on the school. That problem was solved, and we still exist. Purposes change. I figure you probably get that.
|
I think our two orgs have VERY different recollection of this period. ATO's version is we took the best students at VMI, which by natural effect rather than back room politics led to them controlling all leadership positions of the corps. Hopkins thought he was being unfairly excluded from corps leadership because he was not part of this fraternity & they would not admit him. So, he broke into our original ritual, which involved members washing the feet of new members as in Jesus doing so to with the disciples with all the lessons connected to that. Of course he was ejected with some force, as any of us would do today if some random kicked in the door during in any of our initiation rituals. He then accused our Alpha chapter of hazing, but not in the way any of us understand it now. His claims were required participation in secret ritual, having a leadership hierarchy, and that outside the fraternity they were less than accepting to what we'd today call GDIs wanting to seize power at the University.
I don't see that as any different than modern situations where non-greeks don't like greeks and are mad when greeks control a lot of student government or other positions on campus through what often seems less than democratic means.
That is our recollection of our perspective. I fully understand and respect that Sigma Nu has a different recollection/perspective. Hence, this is not the thing we should seek agreement on.
In terms of change, yes absolutely the mission can change over time. I said specifically that if that original mission has passed away then the org should remake itself with a new bigger vision. ATO completely remade our ritual in the 1880s. It was still the original founder that did it, and still basically the same purpose, but it took that 15-20 years to refine our purpose from what some kids in their early 20s came up with during a tumultuous period of history to a more mature long-term vision for the world.
But, my impression is not that Sigma Nu had a short-term vision. I get the short-term complaint raised by your founders. For better or worse, that's fine (even if your snake is specifically to oppose our Christian basis). But I don't believe that's what Sigma Nu was founded on. I'm not a Sigma Nu so I'm just guessing. That may have been the catalyst that motivated their creation, but I suspect the ritual and meaning of the org from its early days is aimed at something quite a bit more meaningful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
As Kevin said, people rarely join organizations whose purposes they find to be pointless. They also rarely take kindly to some outsider standing in judgment of them or commenting on whether their purposes are valid or not. It's just not your call.
|
Yes, and at no point have I disagreed with that. I said I want to believe all orgs were established with a grand change the world vision rather than just correcting some short-term injustice or being a social club. I was asked my personal opinion on the theoretical case of an org having either lost its way or never having had such a broad meaningful mission in the first place. And I said, they should get back to their roots &/or remake themselves with such a purpose for being, or they should cease to exist. I don't want anyone to dissolve. I want them to find that change the world mission and focus the existence of their org on that.
You're right that it's not my place to judge if any particular org does or does not have such a purpose, and at no time have I done so. I am not some god of greek life with the authority to decide if an org has purpose and should continue to exist, nor do I have any desire to be. I haven't seen their rituals & don't understand their meanings. I can only see the surface, and I'll tell you right now that a whole lot of ATO outwardly projects something different than the org I described earlier. That doesn't change the soul of it, and even if I wanted to I can't judge the soul of other groups without being able to see it first hand. So, at no time have I said anything about any other org.
My confusion here is because the only way I can see anyone being angry with what I said is if they thought their own org didn't have a real reason for being and had in fact become little more than a social club. I really hope that no one thinks that about their own org, and if they do I hope they are working aggressively to change it.