University of Virginia Library

Different Interests

"The heretic" blandly states that
fraternity men and independents
are "two different interest groups"
but fails to give even the slightest
hint as to what these radically
different interests are.

The truth is that a fraternity-independent
split would not solve
student government's problems,
it would in fact exacerbate them;
personalities, not issues, would
remain firmly entrenched in the
forefront of every campaign. There
is no inherent difference between
fraternity men and independents
per se over any issue which would
concern the Student Council.

The only real interest groups
that can be said to exist at the
University are liberal activists and
conservative traditionalists-those
who demand a certain amount of
change in rules, institutions, and
overall attitudes on one hand and
those who are satisfied with things
as they are on the other. "The
heretic" implies that all fraternity
men are resolute defenders of the
status quo and that all independents
are equally determined
in their attacks upon it. The generalization
is fatally overextended,
and even a limited investigation
would reveal enough liberal fraternity
men and conservative independents
to disprove it.

Instead of a complete split along
fraternity-independent lines, a
liberal-conservative realignment
would be more calculated to bring
"issues rather than personalities"
to the fore. Why not establish two
political bases, one liberal-oriented,
the other on a conservative
bias? Representation
would be on an individual basis
(as it is now in the University
Party) and thus power would be
equitably distributed to fraternity
men and independents alike.

Fraternity men would not then
vote for a candidate simply because
he was a fraternity man
but rather because they supported
his views. The same is true for
independents. If there were any
issues at all in a given campaign,
they would necessarily be forced
to the surface.