My name is Nathan Cofnas. I am a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow in the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge, and I was a College Research Associate at Emmanuel College. The College terminated my affiliation due to arguments I made about the origins of racial disparities. At stake is the question of whether academics in the UK are allowed to question orthodoxies about race and DEI ideology.
About me
I work in the philosophy of biology and ethics. I’m particularly interested in scientific and ethical controversies connected with evolution-informed social science. I’ve published several papers in respected, peer-reviewed journals on the topic of group differences in intelligence.
I’ve defended hereditarianism about race/ethnic differences in IQ. This is the view that genes play a nontrivial role in measured IQ differences among such groups. Hereditarianism does not say that all groups made up of the same “race” or skin color are identical. (For example, “white” or “black” populations in different countries may exhibit substantial differences.) But, in some cases, there are different distributions in intellectual potential among genetically distinguishable populations.
My Substack post
I argued in a Substack article that the evidence strongly indicates that genes play an important role in race differences. In order to defeat wokism, which attributes all group disparities favouring whites to past or present white racism, I argued that we must talk about how natural differences in the distributions of certain traits might lead to different average outcomes.
My article included frank discussions about group differences, and what would happen if, contrary to the ‘woke’ or progressive position, the United States adopted a ‘colourblind’ system as advocated by many conservatives and classical liberals. Citing an internal study conducted by Harvard University, I noted that, if programmes such as affirmative action were abandoned and admissions were based solely on academic qualifications, the outcome would be an unacceptable lack of diversity in university admissions. I pointed out that the consequences of colourblindness would be politically and socially unpalatable, and therefore we must find an alternative solution.
The response
The response to my Substack post was to smear, lie about, and even threaten me. Journalists attributed fake, inflammatory quotes to me. Activists in and outside the University demanded that I be fired from my position in the Faculty of Philosophy and/or at Emmanuel College. Students plastered flyers with my face around campus, making it dangerous for me to walk down the street. Students joined by some professors held a rally to call for me to be fired. They marched through campus chanting “Hey hey, ho ho, Nathan Cofnas has to go”, led by a male student wearing military fatigues and screaming into a megaphone. In a large online message group for undergraduates, students expressed the view that the problem could be solved by assaulting me – threats that, for reasons which remain unclear to me, the University deemed “not credible”.
Initially, both the University and the College defended my right to academic freedom. The University published an official statement about my Substack, which said: “Freedom of speech within the law is a right that sits at the heart of the University of Cambridge.” The Master of Emmanuel, Doug Chalmers, gave a statement to the student newspaper referring to my “academic right, as enshrined by law, to write about [my] views”. However, after activists increased their pressure, the College changed its stance.
Emmanuel decided to terminate my position as College Research Associate. In a letter they explained their reasoning as follows:
The Committee first considered the meaning of the blog and concluded that it amounted to, or could reasonably be construed as amounting to, a rejection of Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (DEI and EDI) policies...The Committee concluded that the core mission of the College was to achieve educational excellence and that diversity and inclusion were inseparable from that. The ideas promoted by the blog therefore represented a challenge to the College’s core values and mission.
According to Emmanuel College, you must accept the post-2014 DEI orthodoxy, or else you cannot be employed as an academic.
Some of the most prominent scholars in the world have raised objections to the way I’ve been treated. Peter Singer published an article, ‘Will Cambridge Support Free Speech?’ This was followed by a letter to the Times signed by Roger Crisp, Partha Dasgupta, Marie Daouda, Paul Elbourne, Jonathan Glover, Coleman Hughes, Matthew Kramer, Brian Leiter, Jeff McMahan, Francesca Minerva, Steven Pinker, Robert Plomin, Peter Singer, and Amia Srinivasan, which “urge[d] Emmanuel College to reverse its decision and the Faculty of Philosophy and the Leverhulme Trust to call off their investigations”. Nevertheless, the College decided to bend to activist pressure.
Why I need your help
The expulsion by Emmanuel College creates a precedent that academics in the UK are not allowed to critically examine DEI ideology.
With the help of the Free Speech Union, I discovered documents showing that Emmanuel’s own rules make it clear that they did not have the authority to dismiss me.
I have instructed solicitor James Murray of Doyle Clayton and barrister Tom Cross to challenge my dismissal by Emmanuel. The goal is to establish vital new legal principles in English law on the right to academic freedom under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the protection of academics expressing their philosophical beliefs under the Equality Act. Although there are good legal precedents regarding criticism of gender ideology, there are currently few precedents bearing on the right of academics to express politically incorrect views about race.
Your help is crucial and deeply appreciated.
Initial funds will cover the cost of a pre-action protocol letter, which will in turn shape the next steps in the litigation, including the choice of court in which the claim will be brought.
If a legal dispute about this matter arises with the University itself, I plan to use funds from this crowdfunder to support that action. I will update this page at each step.
Thank you for your support.