This was never sent, but it damn well should have been.

Oxford Rebukes Black Activists

The letter (below) is a response from Oxford University to black students attending as Rhodes Scholars who demand the university removes the statue of Oxford Benefactor, Cecil Rhodes.  Interestingly, Chris Patten (Lord Patten of Barnes), The Chancellor of Oxford University, was on the Today Programme on BBC Radio 4 on precisely the same topic.  The Daily Telegraph headline yesterday was “Oxford will not rewrite history”.

Lord Patten commented: “Education is not indoctrination. Our history is not a blank page on which we can write our own version of what it should have been according to our contemporary views and prejudice.”

Dear Scrotty Students,

Cecil Rhodes’s generous bequest has contributed greatly to the comfort and well being of many generations of Oxford students — a good many of them, dare we say it, better, brighter and more deserving than you.

This does not necessarily mean we approve of everything Rhodes did in his lifetime — but then we don’t have to.  Cecil Rhodes died over a century ago.  Autres temps, autres moeurs.  If you don’t understand what this means — and it would not remotely surprise us if that were the case — then we really think you should ask yourself the question:  “Why am I at Oxford?”

Oxford, let us remind you, is the world’s second oldest extant university.  Scholars have been studying here since at least the 11th century.  We’ve played a major part in the invention of Western civilisation, from the 12th century intellectual renaissance through the Enlightenment and beyond.  Our alumni include William of Ockham, Roger Bacon, William Tyndale, John Donne, Sir Walter Raleigh, Erasmus, Sir Christopher Wren, William Penn, Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), Samuel Johnson, Robert Hooke, William Morris, Oscar Wilde, Emily Davison, Cardinal Newman, Julie Cocks.  We’re a big deal.  And most of the people privileged to come and study here are conscious of what a big deal we are.  Oxford is their alma mater — their dear mother — and they respect and revere her accordingly.

And what were your ancestors doing in that period?  Living in mud huts, mainly.  Sure, we’ll concede you the short-lived Southern African civilisation of Great Zimbabwe.  But let’s be brutally honest here.  The contribution of the Bantu tribes to modern civilisation has been as near as damn it to zilch.

You’ll probably say that’s “racist”.  But it’s what we here at Oxford prefer to call “true.”  Perhaps the rules are different at other universities.  In fact, we know things are different at other universities.  We’ve watched with horror at what has been happening across the pond from the University of Missouri to the University of Virginia and even to revered institutions like Harvard and Yale:  the “safe spaces”;  the black lives matter;  the creeping cultural relativism;  the stifling political correctness;  what Allan Bloom rightly called “the closing of the American mind”.  At Oxford however, we will always prefer facts and free, open debate to petty grievance-mongering, identity politics and empty sloganeering.  The day we cease to do so is the day we lose the right to call ourselves the world’s greatest university.

Of course, you are perfectly within your rights to squander your time at Oxford on silly, vexatious, single-issue political campaigns.  (Though it does make us wonder how stringent the vetting procedure is these days for Rhodes scholarships and even more so, for Mandela Rhodes scholarships).  We are well used to seeing undergraduates — or, in your case, postgraduates — making idiots of themselves.  Just don’t expect us to indulge your idiocy, let alone genuflect before it.  You may be black — “BME” as the grisly modern terminology has it — but we are colour blind.  We have been educating gifted undergraduates from our former colonies, our Empire, our Commonwealth and beyond for many generations.  We do not discriminate over sex, race, colour or creed.  We do, however, discriminate according to intellect.

That means, inter alia, that when our undergrads or postgrads come up with fatuous ideas, we don’t pat them on the back, give them a red rosette and say:  “Ooh, you’re black and you come from South Africa.  What a clever chap you are!”  No.  We prefer to see the quality of those ideas tested in the crucible of public debate.  That’s another key part of the Oxford intellectual tradition, you see:  you can argue any damn thing you like but you need to be able to justify it with facts and logic — otherwise your idea is worthless.

This ludicrous notion you have that a bronze statue of Cecil Rhodes should be removed from Oriel College because it’s symbolic of “institutional racism” and “white slavery”.  Well even if it is — which we dispute — so bloody what?  Any undergraduate so feeble-minded that they can’t pass a bronze statue without having their “safe space” violated really does not deserve to be here.  And besides, if we were to remove Rhodes’s statue on the premise that his life wasn’t blemish-free, where would we stop?  As one of our alumni Dan Hannan has pointed out, Oriel’s other benefactors include two kings so awful — Edward II and Charles I — that their subjects had them killed.  The college opposite — Christ Church — was built by a murderous, thieving bully who bumped off two of his wives.  Thomas Jefferson kept slaves:  does that invalidate the US Constitution?  Winston Churchill had unenlightened views about Muslims and India:  was he then the wrong man to lead Britain in the war?

Actually, we’ll go further than that.  Your Rhodes Must Fall campaign is not merely fatuous but ugly, vandalistic and dangerous.  We agree with Oxford historian RW Johnson that what you are trying to do here is no different from what ISIS and the Al-Qaeda have been doing to artefacts in places like Mali and Syria.  You are murdering history.

And who are you, anyway, to be lecturing Oxford University on how it should order its affairs? Your “rhodesmustfall” campaign, we understand, originates in South Africa and was initiated by a black activist who told one of his lecturers “whites have to be killed”.  One of you — Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh — is the privileged son of a rich politician and a member of a party whose slogan is “Kill the Boer; Kill the Farmer”;  another of you, Ntokozo Qwabe, who is only in Oxford as a beneficiary of a Rhodes scholarship, has boasted about the need for “socially conscious black students” to “dominate white universities, and do so ruthlessly and decisively!”

Great.  That’s just what Oxford University needs.  Some cultural enrichment from the land of Winnie Mandela, burning tyre necklaces, an AIDS epidemic almost entirely the result of government indifference and ignorance, one of the world’s highest per capita murder rates, institutionalised corruption, tribal politics, anti-white racism and a collapsing economy.  Please name which of the above items you think will enhance the lives of the 22,000 students studying here at Oxford.

And then please explain what it is that makes your attention grabbing campaign to remove a listed statue from an Oxford college more urgent, more deserving than the desire of probably at least 20,000 of those 22,000 students to enjoy their time here unencumbered by the irritation of spoilt, ungrateful little tossers on scholarships they clearly don’t merit using racial politics and cheap guilt-tripping to ruin the life and fabric of our beloved university.

Understand us and understand this clearly:  you have everything to learn from us;  we have nothing to learn from you.


Oriel College, Oxford

Like I said:  it should have been sent.  But because Oxford is now staffed by a bunch of timorous cowards and/or people who actually believe that these ingrates have a point, I can pretty much guarantee that it wasn’t even written by a current member of the faculty.  If it was, I can absolutely guarantee that the heroic scribe would now be looking for employment elsewhere, and not finding any.

Sic semper infirmissima cum turba iratus est.  I think the faculty will understand this — and they’d better, because their antagonists understand it only too well.


  1. The letter presumes one can reason with these people, which is not true, and it’s far too long and prolix.

    I think “Touch that statue and we’ll kill you.” is better. Concise, accurate, simple enough even for simpletons.

  2. Kim,

    We’re long past the time of playing petty-fingers with this rabble. What is need is a “You’ve had your temper-tantrum, tirade, and blew off some steam. You’re upset. Deal with it. Or, we will”

    Civilization is more than +1’s, POB’s (pat on back), and looking at our accomplishments. Its the hard work making them happen, giving them maintenance, and the support and associated work to make the accomplishments. The brave infants don’t see they stand on the shoulders of or predecessors who endeavored, sweat, and died to get us where we are. We who realize are grateful, and do it for the future generations.

    All good cattlemen know that you have to cull out that bad calf from the herd, for the harm it can sow. We’re reaching that time of the cur.

  3. The posted version for the deserving 20,000 who love the English language..
    For the black racist scrottys – just some excerpts.

    Oxford, let us remind you, is the world’s second oldest extant university. Scholars have been studying here since at least the 11th century. We’ve played a major part in the invention of Western civilisation, from the 12th century intellectual renaissance through the Enlightenment and beyond.

    And what were your ancestors doing in that period? Living in mud huts, mainly. … But let’s be brutally honest here. The contribution of the Bantu tribes to modern civilisation has been zilch. Understand us and understand this clearly: you have everything to learn from us; we have nothing to learn from you.
    So STFU, or go back to your Bantu shithole. And if you touch that statue, we’ll hang you from it, pour encourage les autres. The Saxon can hate too.

  4. Let me get this straight: Believing that all people have certain characteristics because of their skin color is racist. But all white people are racist. And all black people have the same culture. So a black kid who grew up in Hawaii, went to private schools, then Ivy League college and law school, then was elected Senator, then President had the same disadvantages as the black kid who grew up in Detroit, dropped out of school in 10th grade and went to prison for carjacking at age 18. While the son of a coal miner in Appalachia who didn’t get past 8th grade because his father died in a cave in and he had to support his mother and younger siblings had all the advantages that the first two lacked because he’s white. Did I get that right?

    A friend’s son (age 22, the age where you know everything) has gone full-woke lately, explaining to his elders about White Privilege. He says it means that the color of your skin didn’t make your life harder. Well guess what buttercup, SOMETHING is going to make your life harder than it might otherwise have been. Poverty, illness, economic downturn, parents dying when you’re young, disability, all sorts of things make life hard. You can either bitch-and-moan about it, or you can take your nuts in both hands and get on with it.

    Oh, for the record, if you think it’s tough being black in America, try it somewhere else in this world. Hell, poor people in this country live better than 75% of the people in the rest of the world. Before we moved from NJ to PA my wife and I had an old tube-type TV that we bought shortly after we were married in the early 1990s. It still worked fine, but we were given a flat screen. My church was in in area with a lot of poor people, so I asked my priest if he knew anyone who could use it, figuring if someone didn’t have a TV it’s better than staring at the wall. He said the poorest people he knew had flat-screen TVs, so we wound up bringing it to an electronics recycling day.

  5. >>”Thomas Jefferson kept slaves: does that invalidate the US Constitution?”

    That is, clearly, a significant part of the objective of the demoralization campaign, so as to remove those pesky institutional impediments to Marxist progress.

  6. A bit closer to home, it occurs to me that this letter could be applied, without much modification, to the current protests to remove the statue of L.Sullivan Ross, aka “Sully” from Academic Plaza at Texas A&M.

    They object to Sully because he was a brigadier in the Confederate army, and that, after a battle in which his command clashed with two regiments of black troops near Yazoo City, MS, a Memphis newspaper called him “negro killer.”

    Nevermind that, as governor of Texas, and later president of A&M, he made sure A&M, and it’s companion (historically black) school, Prairie View A&M, both received funding from the state, when the legislature wasn’t too enthused about the existence of either.

    A&M may not be as old as Oxford, but it and Prarie View were both founded in 1876, which makes them the oldest public universities in the state (beating t.u. by 7 years; Baylor and TCU are older, but private).

    Like Oxford, at least some of the agitators are attending on scholarship, although these scholarships are athletic ones. And at least some of the ringleaders are “not from around here” – I know at least two of the bigger troublemakers are from NY and FL, scholarship athletes on the track team.

Comments are closed.