Student Organization Seating, formerly known as block seating, will cease to exist next year. With an expected yearly increase in student population and a static student seating capacity in Bryant-Denny Stadium, it will no longer remain viable. It will barely function this year.

The majority of the accusations and contempt will be misplaced, though.

The Honors College Assembly will be seen as the super group that decided to butt into the south end zone with its large member base and long list of individual accolades. The SGA speaker of the senate will be seen as the instigator for block seating’s eventual removal.

When a group that simply follows the rules to apply for seating and a campus representative who simply asks questions about those vague rules are cast as agitators, you know you are at the University of Alabama. We don’t value change; we despise it.

What most may be unaware of is how greek-only block seating was disbanded in the first place. Two years ago, a senior administrator and a selected group of campus leaders – both greek and non-greek – decided over the course of a few meetings to work towards opening up block seating to other organizations.

This group understood the future impact of its goal, mainly setting the stage for block seating’s ultimate demise. None of these meetings were attended by current HCA leadership or the speaker of the senate, and most attendees have already graduated.

Historically, block seating has been the starkest representation of a divided campus. There may only be seven or eight home games a year, but sporting events at this athletic-addicted school should be a time to shed personal differences and cheer for the team that represents all of us. Designating an area that separated some from others restricted that opportunity and bred disdain.

Even if traditionally barred students do not decide to sit in the south end zone once Student Organization Seating is gone, it is important enough that they have the freedom to choose not to.

Many have commented that this was done “the wrong way.” Well, if “the right way” includes waiting until those who have benefited from unchanged policies and minimal supervision decide that they no longer want unfair treatment, I think those individuals may have progress confused with a concept that cares about selfish desires.

I do not condone those who acted aggressively for the sole reason to elicit a delightfully resentful response. Nor do I condone those who spread fear and lies to rally their supporters and create animosity.

At the end of the day, we are all UA students. Of course we do not all see eye to eye. However, this issue is so futile and so driven by those before us that to participate in this ridiculous conflict as if there are winners and losers is to accept that we are pitted against one another.

Though we may be fighting for seats at a football game, we are not playing football. There are no teams. There aren’t even any rules or spectators. We are playing a game invented by students no longer at this University, students who have no meaningful connection with us.

We all stopped looking under the tree once we found out that Santa was created and perpetuated by our parents. When will we stop looking for an ongoing struggle that was created and perpetuated by our alumni?

Student organization seating and block seating served as a great incentive system for organizations to achieve academically and participate philanthropically. Instead of resuscitating organization seating next year, a new incentive system for groups must be created.

Margaret Mead once said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Maybe that small group of progressive campus leaders knew what they were doing; maybe the large group of impetuous students on both sides of campus who refuse to lower their rhetorical weapons do not.

We have an opportunity to create an incentive system that involves all organizations on campus. Who will step above the petty divisions and form such an avant-garde group to settle this controversy?