|
|
|
Does Anybody Care About USG? Bob Nichols
Sometime in the beginning of February, our new USG officers took office. While some, both inside and outside the USG, were extremely vocal about the outcome of the elections, the change doesn’t seem to affect anything on campus at all. Rather the makeup of the USG—-in fact, the USG in its entirety—-appears to have very little impact on life as a Princeton student. At first, I figured this an unreasonable charge. I have little idea who is behind various policies or events, and it is possible that the USG could be influencing life in subtle ways. However, in the “State of the USG” speech sent by then-President Margolin at the end of his term, there appears to be little of substance accomplished. In the course of a year, the USG “proposed” ideas to fix supposed problems in the advising system, “helped prepare” a race survey, took part in a “conference” on sexual assault, “helped plan” discussions of grade inflation, “created a new outline” explaining how students could try to influence tenure, and was “optimistic” that the Administration might “experiment” with a 22-hour study space. Although some of the issues may well be very important, there seems to be no indication that, without the USG, there would be any noticeable difference. While perhaps not completely irrelevant, it seems hard to argue that the USG does anything besides giving the students a token voice in some decisions, a voice which is often ignored, as in the case of the smoking ban. That is not to say that the uselessness of the USG is the fault of its members, past or present. The USG does not have any real power to change life at Princeton. So why do people put emotion and energy into contests to see who gets to spend their spare time talking to the Princeton Administration? Nor is this a criticism of the USG in particular. Not long after the changing of the guard at the USG, I read a column in the Prince complaining about the lack of quality toilet paper in the bathrooms. The article was largely inane. After cringing at the line, “A growing number of students… are taking matters into their own hands—-or, rather, trying to ensure that their hands remain matter-free,” I was left trying to figure out if the entire thing was satire. “But here at Princeton, the administration hasn't caught up with a student body increasingly in favor of an amendment to the toilet paper policy…. ‘And I definitely think the redness and soreness that one-ply toilet paper causes harms the University's academic environment.’” It could be a self-parody. Is this representative of the Prince’s content? I don’t get the Prince regularly, but looking on the newspaper’s front page online I found (in addition to sports reporting and opinion pieces) two articles about world events that were just as readily available at, say, CNN.com, and one article about posters being taken down on campus. On another day, it contained a similar mix, though without any campus articles. Given the wide range of news and opinion sources available without cost, it seems that, while the newspaper (like the USG) is not entirely useless, life at Princeton would not be any different without it. Of course, this line of reasoning could be applied to nearly every extracurricular at Princeton or elsewhere. Would anything be any different for non-singers if there were no a cappella groups? Or for non-political junkies if there was no Whig-Clio at which to play Congress? Perhaps this whole article is attacking straw men. A cappella members join because they really like to sing; athletes because they like their sport. Maybe people like joining the USG because they like going to meetings and trying to come up with theoretical solutions to University problems. Maybe people write for the Prince because they like writing newspaper articles, regardless on the importance of their content. Just because these are not the things I enjoy doesn’t mean that they are any less valid—I’m sure there are those who would think I am wasting my time writing opinion pieces that aren’t going to affect anybody’s opinion. But for some reason, I get the impression that many on campus feel some of these activities are relevant beyond being enjoyable for their participants (and possibly providing resume material). I feel that there are those who would disagree with the statement that USG is next to irrelevant to changing the lives of the student body, and the Prince serves little purpose beyond a giving some a chance to write and reporting experience. So act, if that’s what you enjoy. Sing, if you like to sing. Or drink, if spending every Saturday twelve-deep on the dance floor is more fun than spending it working to get better toilet paper. Or crusade for toilet paper, if you’d rather. But engaging in such activities does not confer upon anybody an undue amount of duty or importance. Not that anybody would want it. We’ll all have time enough to play adult. Bob Nichols is a Sophomore from Connecticut. |
|
|
|
|