Cambridge University is now, essentially, a laughing-stock. Its DEI poster-boy, Jason Arday, whom they appointed Professor of the Sociology of Education in 2023 (aged just 37), has been revealed, rather predictably, to have plagiarized much of his doctoral thesis, to have produced woeful publications, and to be a complete fantasist. In spite of this, Cambridge continues to defend Arday because they are in the thrall of Woke ideology, his elevation seems to challenge "harmful stereotypes" which challenge their ideology, and his being a professor symbolically asserts power over their enemies.

What a ridiculous university, you might think. What is the point of Cambridge University? Its hands are tied by Woke, its corrupt, and genuine scholarship—that fearlessly challenges ideas—is increasingly to be found elsewhere. If you are thinking that, you may be surprised that universities go through cycles, and only 160 years ago, Cambridge was in a very similar position.

By the eighteenth century, Oxford and Cambridge's purpose was to promote Anglicanism. You had to be a confessing Anglican to attend, just as you have to pay lip service to Woke to attend today, with DEI statements. As such, they were little more than religious finishing schools for the upper class that also trained the middle class to be vicars.

As I have discussed in my book The Past Is a Future Country: The Coming Conservative Demographic Revolution, one reason is that universities go through a "priestly cycle." In England, geniuses with outlier high intelligence and autistic traits that render them utterly focused on the truth founded the great universities. They became prestigious, which attracted those of normal-range high intelligence—"Midwits"—who were motivated by status and tended to be socially conformist. They understood the social benefits of conforming to the dominant or soon-to-be dominant ideology, forced themselves to believe it, and then competitively signalled their adherence to it.

Gradually, the Mid-Wits took over the universities, which placed adherence to the received religion above the truth and they drove out geniuses. The universities became decreasingly academic. The geniuses moved elsewhere; the universities declined. Eventually they reformed, began nurturing new geniuses, and the process repeated itself. Hence you see Homerton College, Cambridge. . . a Dissenting Academy absorbed, after religious requirements were dropped in 1871, into Cambridge University.

This described universities in England between the Middle Ages and the late 19th century. Scholastics who strongly focused on logic and truth founded Oxford and Cambridge. They were called to understand God's creation, so to lie would be blasphemous. However, in the mid-17th century, the Church of England controlled both. They were allowed to monopolize degree-granting as long as they upheld the state ideology. This is another means by which the ideology can take-over universities, by offering and money and monopoly in exchange for doctrinal conformity. This was vital because so many Protestant heretics, for example, had emerged from the universities and especially from Cambridge.

Innovative research increasingly took place outside the universities by gentleman scholars, including Charles Darwin (1809-1882), scholar-rectors like Thomas Malthus (1766-1834), and power loom inventor Edmund Cartwright (1743-1823); and enthusiastic amateurs such as the Aberdeenshire shoemaker and scientist Thomas Edward (1814-1886).

The most intelligent students increasingly went abroad to universities in Scotland or the Netherlands, where real thinking was allowed, and the latest science was explored. A number of 18th- and 19th-century British Prime Ministers were educated at Scottish, Dutch or German universities, often after the rite of passage of Oxbridge. The Earl of Bute, regarded as very scholarly, exclusively went to Dutch universities.

For Dissenters such as Unitarians and Methodists who could not afford a university abroad, about 100 dissenting academies proliferated across England between 1750 and 1850. They could not grant degrees, a right limited to Oxbridge, but they could provide higher education. They ranged enormously in size and standard, from one tutor with access to a library to multiple tutors in different subjects.

Some were simply dissenting versions of Oxford or Cambridge, focused on training ministers and on doctrinal conformity. But others, especially Warrington Academy and Hackney New College, were important centres of learning. With a brilliant reputation for teaching science and for preparing young men for business and legal careers, Warrington, which became Manchester Academy, was probably the most prestigious. One of Warrington's tutors, Joseph Priestley (1733-1804), an eminent chemist, discovered oxygen. Some of the academies were considered so superb that even Anglicans, such as Thomas Malthus ("the Malthusian Cycle") and Benjamin Disraeli attended them.

By the mid-19th century, Oxbridge was under serious pressure. Responding to a public mood of religious tolerance, the government permitted the secular University College London to grant degrees. The ancient universities were compelled to reform or die. They chose the former, gradually dropping all religious requirements. The dissenting academies closed down or, in some cases, became Oxford or Cambridge colleges.

We should not be surprised, therefore, by similar developments today. With universities becoming Woke madrassas we see more and more independent scholars, especially in "controversial" areas. We might see scholars flee to non-Western universities. Especially with the rise of the Internet, intelligent young people seek an education in unrecognized online "universities" with non-Woke syllabuses. In November 2021, a number of "cancelled" academics, including philosopher Peter Boghassian, set up the supposedly anti-Woke University of Austin. It seeks accreditation and includes scholars, such as Jonathan Haidt, who have not been cancelled, so it's not quite the same as a true dissenting academy. Critics will, of course, deride these as "fake universities" or as "grifting." One can imagine 18th-century Oxford University tutors speaking of dissenting academies in similar terms. Likewise, we should not be surprised by the rise of academically oriented non-Woke YouTube channels that offer a de facto "education," such as History Debunked, which focuses on correcting Woke History. We are simply seeing a hi-tech version of the dissenting academies.

Of course, the Priestly Cycle, and the state's ability to manipulate, are not the only reasons for what has happened at Cambridge and elsewhere. Universities have grown into massive bureaucracies, which causes rule-following, consensus that is antithetical to the ever-questioning genius, and minimization of risk. Unlike in the nineteenth century, universities have been overtaken by women. Compared to men they are highly socially conformist, conflict-averse and risk-averse, thus turning universities into nursery schools and pushing out the anti-social types that dare to question things and, so, upset people. But these all help to contribute to an environment in which ideology, not rocking the boat, and simply "feelings" are more important than truth. All of the processes make the rise of Jason Arday just as predictable as his fall. The question is, will this be so humiliating for Cambridge, that Cambridge—the home of Isaac Newton and Watson and Crick—will begin to reform, let the serious scholars back in, and focus on original scholarship once more.

https://counter-currents.com/2026/08/jason-arday-was-inevitable/