The amount of control American universities exercise over their students is mind-boggling to me. I went to Uppsala University in Sweden, which has a rich and varied student life. But none of that has anything to do with the University (any of them, there are 3 in town). The universities provide education, period. Housing is not run by the University, and it certainly has nothing to do with student social life.
What stops a bunch of Stanford students from starting whatever club they want in their spare time? Obviously it can't be on Stanford property, so maybe that's the difference, they have their students over a barrel because they can deny them access to housing which I guess is hard to find otherwise?
American universities are not at all like European universities. Think summer camp for young adults, with classes in the background. Campus life and sports are just as important as academics. European universities are much more bare-bones and focused on their core mission of education. That's mostly good, in my opinion, as university is way cheaper in Europe and students tend to be more focused on their studies, but it also means that as a student, you're much more on your own. At an American university, there are always dozens of administrators or counselors you can go talk to about any issue you have, from "How do I register for this class?" to issues in your personal life.
The difference is that most of Europe considers adulthood to start at 18, whereas the US considers true adulthood to start at age 21.
In most European countries, universities do not have these invasive policies because it’s culturally unacceptable to control the lives of other adults.
> What stops a bunch of Stanford students from starting whatever club they want in their spare time?
Nothing, but greek system was advantaged over random non-greek friends groups or clubs. If you start own random non-greek club, the university wont guarantee or give you house for it. For the record, Standford always had plenty of students who were not members of Greek clubs. They created and participated in own spare time activities too.
In Europe, if your spare time club rents a house, it will have street number and no one will act as if it was great injustice. Based on article, that is destruction and homogenity. In Europe, if you fill the entire floor with sand and bulldozer it away to property you dont own, through property you dont own, the house owner will object - but in article university administrators are the bad guys for objecting.
> Nothing, but greek system was advantaged over random non-greek friends groups or clubs. If you start own random non-greek club, the university wont guarantee or give you house for it.
For what it's worth, the university I went to (UT Dallas [0]) didn't provide on-campus housing to any organization, including the greeks. I had a friend who was in a frat, and I didn't realize it for a long time because he just lived in an apartment on campus like anyone else. Some of the greeks bought off-campus houses, and the rest didn't have any housing at all, just an office somewhere on campus.
The only privilege I remember the greeks having was they were the only organizations who were allowed to post up flyers advertising their events anywhere on campus, while non-greek organizations could only advertise in spaces relevant to whatever department sponsors them and a couple of shared spaces (which is something I remember clubs I was part of being really grumpy about).
[0] caveat: I graduated 15 years ago, so for all I know things may have changed since
Stanford did provided housing to them. Not just office, but they had reserved dorm houses in best part of the campus. The loss of those houses is what article complains about when it complains about "generic, unmarked houses". The house used to be reserved for fraternity members only. Now, the unaffiliated students can be assigned to live there too. Alternative spin is that fraternity does not get to decide who lives in those dorms nor what rules should they follow anymore.
Also related, Standford did survey over what students think about Greek life on the campus and its future. Most students 83% preferred to reform, de-housing them, or abolishing it. Two articles about survey:
> The only privilege I remember the greeks having was they were the only organizations who were allowed to post up flyers advertising their events anywhere on campus, while non-greek organizations could only advertise in spaces relevant to whatever department sponsors them and a couple of shared spaces (which is something I remember clubs I was part of being really grumpy about).
Isn't this pretty large advantage if the topic is social life? As in, when it comes to events and social life, this is University giving them pretty massive advantage.
What I've concluded over the years is that this is actually what the American people want. In other words, the policing is not "happening" to us - it is requested by us. The same way people like to watch those viral videos of monkeys being bullied.
It only takes a few of these types of people in a community to make it feel policed (and that overall, people are neutral towards this happening).
Also, I want to point out it's not just in the US. I live in Germany now, and it's far worse here (people are seriously out for blood regarding minor indiscretions), but the legal system is more neutered/fair. You can see this in threads where people will post a cool thing they built, and people will chime in reminding them that they are breaking the law by not having an impressum (in Germany and Austria you're forced to put your name + address on almost everything):
Imagine doing the same thing for people talking about smoking pot on HN: "Just so you know, marijuana is illegal... so yeah, I'm gonna report you, sorry to ruin the fun".
My main point is that it often feels like the policing institutions exist outside of us, but in reality it's just our next door neighbors.
I heard a cybersecurity instructor remark once that “the more complete surveillance tools are, police become wardens, crimes become infractions, and citizens become inmates.”
His previous job was as a guard at a federal prison.
> What stops a bunch of Stanford students from starting whatever club they want in their spare time?
In my country, nothing - but if your club is willing to submit to the university authorities, they will provide some resources that will help the club survive your graduation.
For example, spaces at new-member-recruitment events when the university gets a new class of students, usage of university rooms outside of teaching hours, some storage space, maybe some money, and so on.
And because clubs for students have to completely replace their membership every 3-4 years in order to survive, that help can be the difference between a club that continues to exist and one that doesn't.
> What stops a bunch of Stanford students from starting whatever club they want in their spare time?
Technically nothing, but often times its funding. If it's a university sponsored club, the school will give you money in certain cases. Often times students rely on that money to keep the club going, depending on what they do.
What stops a bunch of Stanford students from starting whatever club they want in their spare time? Obviously it can't be on Stanford property, so maybe that's the difference, they have their students over a barrel because they can deny them access to housing which I guess is hard to find otherwise?