The University of Edinburgh has released a contentious report titled “Decolonised Transformations: Confronting the University of Edinburgh’s History and Legacies of Enslavement and Colonialism.” Commissioned in the wake of the death of George Floyd and the subsequent Black Lives Matter protests, the report aims to address the university’s past and its implications for present-day issues regarding racism. However, it has raised significant questions about its focus and methodology.
The report does not directly address current grievances or complaints related to race among staff and students, which would typically serve as key indicators of existing issues. Instead, it primarily relies on administrative data regarding the ethnic and racial composition of the university’s staff and student body over the years 2018 to 2023. The findings indicate a decrease in the proportion of white individuals, an increase in the number of Asians, while the representation of Black individuals and others has remained relatively stable at around 7 percent among staff and 10 percent among students. The report expresses concern about the stagnant numbers of Black individuals and others, yet it does not provide a clear rationale for what an ideal demographic distribution should be or the underlying reasons for the current figures.
In an attempt to assess experiences of racism at the university, two questionnaires were administered, although their scope was limited. The sample was small and self-selected, lacking the statistical reliability necessary for drawing broad conclusions. The questions posed were perceived as leading, focusing more on subjective experiences rather than objective evidence of racism. Consequently, the data presented is opaque and inconclusive.
Historical Context and Scholarly Critique
The report begins with a discussion of the university’s historical context. It attempts to reveal lesser-known aspects of Enlightenment history and its connections to racism. However, critics have noted that the scholarship is often inadequate and fails to contribute new insights, reiterating points that have been well-established in academic discourse. For instance, Nancy Stepan has addressed the topic of “scientific racism” extensively in her 1982 work, “The Idea of Race in Science: Great Britain, 1800-1969.”
The report’s focus on the early 19th century, a period marked by Romanticism as much as Enlightenment ideals, raises further questions. The language used can mislead, suggesting that the University of Edinburgh played an exaggerated role in fostering racist ideologies, without adequately comparing its history to that of other institutions in Europe and America.
The conflation of “scientific racism” with concepts of social evolution is another point of contention. While good science, influenced by Enlightenment thinking, has discredited simplistic racial classifications, the report treats these ideas as interchangeable. Scholars argue that understanding the distinctions between these concepts is essential for rigorous academic inquiry.
Moral Implications and Contemporary Relevance
Beyond its quantitative and historical arguments, the report appears to rest on a moral assertion about responsibility and privilege. It suggests that individuals inherit moral obligations from their ancestors, a viewpoint reminiscent of clan societies. In modern liberal frameworks, moral accountability is assigned to individuals rather than social groups, leading to concerns that the report’s implications could perpetuate divisive narratives.
Despite revealing little evidence of ongoing racial discrimination, the report proposes that historical injustices continue to influence the present. This approach has been criticized for relying on abstract reasoning rather than concrete evidence. Many scholars argue that the report largely reiterates established historical narratives regarding discredited racial ideologies, while failing to sufficiently substantiate contemporary claims of racial injustice.
The University of Edinburgh’s Race Review invites robust debate about its findings and methodologies. As discussions about race and equality evolve, the university’s community may benefit from engaging with this report critically, ensuring that future inquiries into its history and policies are informed by rigorous scholarship and a commitment to inclusivity.
