Short thread about Cambridge’s announcement that it's investigating the University’s links to the slave trade. 
V. happy that this has been front-page news. I’m not on the vice-chancellor’s working party and I don’t speak for the University, but here are some thoughts about the road ahead.
theguardian.com/education/2019…
theguardian.com/education/2019…
I think the sentiment here is genuine; the VC deserves a lot of credit for leading on this. (Also Martin Millett, Adam Branch, @MonicaMorenoFig, et al.) It’s also great that the working party represents a diverse set of faculty and has ambitious goals.
cam.ac.uk/news/cambridge…
cam.ac.uk/news/cambridge…
They’ve put a strong research agenda at the heart of this; I hope the University will also make use of the enormous amount of work that’s been done in other universities on this issue. (See thread below.)
I am anxious about a few things, in no particular order.
1. So far this is just about the university, not the colleges. A lot of people outside Cambridge don’t understand that the University has relatively little power over colleges, esp. the richer ones. But clearly the colleges will be a huge part of the larger story.
If you’re an alum or a current student, I’d advise you to contact your college asap and ask them if they’re planning to get involved in the University effort. If not, why not? Some will rush to climb aboard; others will need to be nudged in the right direction.
2. It’s really important that the thinking involved, & the public engagement, isn’t mostly undertaken by middle-aged white men. I appreciate the irony here & I’m not glib about the burden of ‘race work’ for colleagues of colour. But this can’t be a liberal white male effort.
3. One crucial question from other universities: when is the work complete? I hope Cambridge defines this not as an event but an ongoing commitment. If a significant part of Cambridge’s wealth/power is linked to slavery, we can never put that behind us. It’s part of us forever.
4. Some of the media commentary (beyond confusing ‘reparations’ with ‘repatriation’, see below) is focused on the idea that _today’s_ Britons don’t approve of slavery so why would we dig this up?
That’s why it’s so important to insist on the long-range impacts, financial & otherwise, of this huge injustice. Also to ask tough but obvious questions about, say, Cambridge's problems with racial representation/'diversity' in the present. More on that in a minute.
5. There will be efforts to argue that Cambridge dons and administrators in the 18th/19th centuries were ‘prisoners of their time’; that we’re judging the past by the morals of the present.
In theory that’s a reasonable objection. In fact, the slave trade (& institution of slavery) peaked in the late 18th/early 19th c. at precisely the moment abolitionism went viral. It’s not an excuse to claim that our forbears didn’t know what they were doing or why it was wrong.
6. Black British Caribbean students are underrepresented at Cambridge at every level. (Undergrad to staff.) The University has to address the enduring legacies of slavery and think about forms of reparative justice. Scholarships and representation should be part of this.
7. A lot of people who work on reparative justice will be suspicious. They’ll accuse the University of ‘race-washing’. Cambridge needs to accept this and win the trust of communities which will see this as a PR stunt until we can demonstrate good outcomes as well as intentions.
If you have any connection to Cambridge please use your influence (however slight/distant) to remain engaged and keep the University (esp. the colleges) on the right track. We're much likelier to get good results if everyone pays close attention./
OK, if you have thirty seconds and are a Cambridge student/staff member/alumnus, please consider signing this open letter asking colleges to join the University's initiative on Cambridge's ties to the slave trade. docs.google.com/document/d/1LI…
