Oxford is Now More or Less a Quango
There is an increasingly palpable sentiment that the elite educational institutions across the Western world are changing, and not for the better. Still, the reputations of Oxford and Cambridge retain a veneer of exceptional knowledge-creation based on their high educational standards, merit-based admission of students and the collective genius of historic alumni. The binary star-system of elite British education – often merged in the ‘Oxbridge’ portmanteau – is comparable only to the prestigious Ivy League group of universities in the United States.
But as these world-class institutions remain mired in controversy, having become germinal hotbeds for progressive activist protest movements, there is a growing recognition that the Cambridge of Bertrand Russell is not the Cambridge of Palestine Action, the Oxford of John Ruskin is not the Oxford of Riz Possnett. Confidence in these institutions has plummeted as standards of quality and excellence have slowly been eroded, all while academic freedom steadily declines, leaving the UK languishing in the 64th position in one world ranking.
Wards of the State
British universities have increasingly resembled quangos or politicised NGOs, having become helpless hosts of a parasitic and bloated state. At the behest of successive governments wielding the extensive powers of the Office for Students, universities have swapped academic selection for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) practices, while trading academic rigour for a student-as-consumer model. Drunk on inflated international admission fees paid by a seemingly infinite reservoir of Chinese and Indian foreign students, our universities have lost their way; they can no longer be fairly compared to the institutions they once were despite retaining the international prestige that their historic reputations bring.

The mark of having been ‘educated’ in one of our Higher Education Institutions can be identified by a myriad of jargonistic buzz-concepts. The mandatory embedding of DEI (often re-ordered as EDI in Britain) across degree-level curriculums has produced graduates equipped with concepts of ‘decoloniality’, ‘feminist, gender, queer and trans theory’, analyses of ‘whiteness’ or ‘blackness’, and consideration of a ‘global majority’ in all subject fields, from history to law, and increasingly in the scientific domain. Meanwhile, elite Universities are brazenly screening aspiring faculty by requiring that they profess their ideological commitment in the application process. In the alarming case of Oxford University, applicants were asked to submit “evidence of interest and effectiveness in promoting a culture of equality and diversity in the workplace”. This principle is applied at all levels of the educational sector. With a budget totalling more than £7 billion, government funding of academic research hinges upon a clear demonstration of ideological allegiance; a practice clearly designed to impose a chilling effect on research and the projects researchers consider worthy of pursuit. Shockingly, there are now efforts to implement this model across all public funding of British universities. This proposal means that a university can be defunded if it does not meet the constantly-morphing chameleonic demands of diversity and inclusion.
Reform and DOGE UK
In contrast to the United States, where the White House has shown that it is willing to confront the activist-radicalism operating on some elite campuses, these practices are in ascendancy in Britain. The ‘vibe-shift’ in American politics has injected a direly-needed dose of optimism across the pond, signalling that reform is indeed possible and that British politics need not be limited to a sclerosis of the ‘uniparty’. Nigel Farage has propelled Reform UK to unparalleled popularity, all while DOGE UK is in its formative stages and the Procurement Files unearths a trend eerily mirroring DOGE US’s discoveries from its investigation into USAID. Meanwhile, a surprise decision by the Office for Students found that the University of Sussex had acted to curb the academic freedom of one of its professors of philosophy, Kathleen Stock, known for her gender critical views, resulting in an unprecedented £585,000 fine. The decision in March 2025 seemed to pre-empt the UK Supreme Court’s ruling that the concept of sex is binary in law, dramatically vindicating Professor Stock’s gender-critical beliefs. Unsurprisingly, with heels dug in, the University of Sussex recognised no error on its part, stating that the ruling will only harm the “diversity and vibrancy” of British universities.
If managed decline is to be swapped for the optimism of change, it would take an unparalleled revision of the aims of various non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs, i.e., quangos), such as the Office for Students and UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and its subordinate research councils. The restoration of British educational excellence relies on the rediscovery of its foundational principles: genuine academic freedom can only flourish when researchers are not cowed from subjects due to restrictive funding practices; only when aspiring faculty are hired on the basis of merit, not ideological leaning, can true viewpoint diversity exist.
Admittedly, this seems a gargantuan task, but these public bodies remain under the authority of Parliament and a willing government would have the legal ability and democratic mandate to enact the necessary reforms. A ‘bonfire of the quangos’ has been the intention of all governments in recent memory, with both Labour and Reform UK now having announced their intention to cut government spending and ‘de-bureaucratise’ decision-making. Only Reform UK, however, has expressly stated its opposition to the entrenchment of DEI in public bodies, and its recent local election wins have jolted factions within Labour to follow suit. We are perched atop a tide which may be turning. But if politics is downstream of culture, then it faces an 11th-hour upstream swim against the tide if we are to return our historic universities to their former prestige.
Darren Gee is London-born and based writer and cultural critic. Follow him on Substack.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Timely article. I wonder if the staff at Universities are aware of how rapidly they are disintegrating? Some may, but just keep quiet longing for retirement, most others are probably clueless.
I wouldn’t recommend any A level students attend any of these ‘Division, Exclusion, Injustice’ madrassas, unless their career goal absolutely demands it.
It’s easy to see the problem. The Left has wormed its way in and the Left are only capable of destructive acts, never constructive. The evidence is everywhere you look. Unfortunately people never seem to learn until it’s too late.
I read somewhere that this problem exists in the US Ivy League colleges. I’ll see if I can find the article and repost. But the gist is that some companies in the US are saying that a large number of graduates are simply not good enough. I suppose the only good thing is that companies are waking up to the problem. Politicians and lefties seem to be living in a strange world which they have created but I guess they don’t have the analytical skills and intelligence to look at their creation, perhaps because they believe their ideological mindset is perfect and settled and therefore can’t be challenged.
I wonder if they can be stopped in time to save civilisation! I’m not holding my breath.
Edit: This is not the article I was thinking of, in fact it’s a video but it does illustrate that this is a western problem in general.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxrfsT7PK8I
There has been plenty on this from Gateway Pundit.
“I wouldn’t recommend any A level students attend any of these ‘Division, Exclusion, Injustice’ madrassas, unless their career goal absolutely demands it.”
Totally agree
When I meet oxbridge students I feel the same pity I feel for Labradors when their owners tells me they were sent for gun dog training.
At least gun dogs are useful and labradors are pleasant company and generally intelligent.
I love seeing the gundogs at work. Such an amazing bond with their owners and working in such harmony.
A sheepdog follows me and my mate playing tennis. He will run forever with maximum energy.
If managed decline is to be swapped for the optimism of change
It’s not really managed decline, it’s the degeneracy of decadence. And this in turn is why our universities have willingly and enthusiastically crossed the threshold into the New Dark Age.
DEI (often re-ordered as EDI in Britain)
I always order the initials as DIE, since it means DIE-whitey.
Spot on.
I believe “DIE must DIE” are the three appropriate words.
Division, inequality and Exclusion.
Divide, communities, create inequality and exclude certain ethnic groups (usually the majority)
“Nigel Farage has propelled Reform UK to unparalleled popularity”
No he hasn’t. 30% in the polls, only 6 points ahead of Labour 4 years from a General Election is hardly unparalleled popularity.
Unparalleled insofar as this is the highest Reform UK has yet polled.
By the end of the year, when the full effect of the Apr tax rises are plainly visible, I suspect it will be much higher. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it in the mid 30s.
I was sceptical of voting Reform given how much I know about Farage’s failings as a party leader, and given that Sushi had stupidly rushed the election to try to prevent Reform getting organised, I saw that they were just getting started with no track record. We had a couple of independents but one trumpeted how she had been on the council’s climate change committee so therefore she was Far Left. It was either spoil the paper or Reform so I went Reform. I think many others may have been the same but following the election and then what has happened since they are on the up. What they need to do now is deliver at the council level and hopefully do well again next May especially in Wales.
The Rupert Lowe incident still needs to unravel.
And we don’t yet know whether Zia, who owns half of the party along with Farage, wants Islamic Law as standard in the UK, increasing the number of Sharia courts and making them legal. The lawyers would need to be reeducated! 🙂
Many have said that the ‘Conservative Party’ ceased to be conservative, in part, because Call-Me-Dave didn’t understand just how much Blair had changed the British Constitution, by outsourcing decision making, away from Parliament, greatly weakening the concept of the Crown in Parliament. Examples include the supreme court and the climate change committee. They will be a block on any change in policy, so, if these changes are not reversed, immediately on attaining government, with a detailed manifesto to back to up, the civil service and House of Lords will cause trouble, all will be in vain.
Writing the manifesto will require knowledgeable and experienced professionals from many disciplines, as we don’t want tight legislate where freedom used to prevail. Just think of the many dysfunctional organisations we have, yet there is no sign of this preparation within the Reform Party. And the next general election could be sooner than 2029.
Normally I would agree that a manifesto should be robust and bulletproof but judging from the parliaments of the past 30 years it seems that once in power they do whatever they want.
so in short why on earth should reform hold themselves to a higher standard. IMHO they should do whatever it takes to get into power then sort out the mess the Uniparty has created.
An American said a few days ago that the UK needs anther Oliver Cromwell, I tend to agree.
“Drunk on inflated international admission fees paid by a seemingly infinite reservoir of Chinese and Indian foreign students”
Well at least those people are not paying with my money. I think we have among the highest proportion of school leavers going to uni in the whole world, a lot of whom probably benefit little, and this is underwritten by the laughably titled “loan” system (funny loan system where paying back is based on whether you earn enough). Without that loan system and its generous terms, many fewer UK students would go to university, and they are the country would be better off for it, IMO.
Picky point – I really don’t like the term “gender critical”. I think it’s a term invented by the enemy. I am not “critical of gender” – I just recognise the reality that sex is binary and “gender” applied to anything but grammar is meaningless. A box of Smarties to someone who comes up with a suitable snappy phrase that encapsulates that.
Thanks for the feedback. A worthy tangent I did not pursue here is how, because of the increasing numbers of ‘global majority’ students, EDI is being embedded even further. Fresh Chinese and Indian students who formerly had no awareness of such a system, now increasingly rely upon it: as a basis for their research, as well as in their interactions with the administrative work of these institutions.
A more common phenomenon now, for example, is seeing Chinese students with a Palestinian badge or sticker on their bag.
Thanks for that information – that is a worrying trend.
Typical socialism: a loan means it’s to be paid back, so no need to delve too much into what involves. It’s financial transaction. Gift, that a different matter all together!
Indeed. It’s tax on financially successful graduates. If you are pretty likely to be financially successful, a lot will go to uni anyway because they need to or want to, some will be put off. If you are someone whose career prospects are not going to be enhanced by a mediocre degree in something not all that useful, you have an incentive to go to uni and have fun and take advantage of basically free money. It’s perverse.
When I was there, and for years afterwards, the sense I always got visiting Cambridge was “intellectual excellence.” The last time I went there, in 2019, I instead had an overwhelming impression of “finance.”
Perhaps the greatest indicator of the Oxbridge decline is shown by the fact that most of our political elite – including Ed Milliband – went there and are now applying their education.
Some USA institutions, JPL, Livermore, Zurich, but not Oxbridge now
Iain McGilchrist was bemoaning the fact we need more Arts and Humanities taught at university.
What, I thought: we are plagued by dysfunctional Arts and Humanities graduates, especially in Westminster, Whitehall, the Media and universities.
And then I realised the problem: recent Arts and Humanities graduates didn’t learn traditional Arts and Humanities at the prestigious centres of learning.
QED
And most correctly reordered as DIE.
‘A ‘bonfire of the quangos’ has been the intention of all governments in recent memory,’
Not true I believe. While they have all said that they will do thing, nothing has ever happened which leads me to believe it was just bullshit.
Rupert Lowe does suggest looking at what they do, rather than what they say.
Money talks and often talks nonsense when the sense has run out – just to keep the money coming in. A sane and responsible government would cut off any funding to seditious, ruinous and divisive ideologies as promoted in many quangos, uni’s and the activist ‘charities’.