How Slavery Money and Shady Donors Keep Race Bias Alive at Oxbridge

Elite universities have long presented themselves as meritocracies — places where talent and hard work open doors regardless of background. But a new commentary by Dr Shravan Nosib, published in the Mauritius Times, challenges that narrative head-on, arguing that institutions like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Yale are structurally designed to reproduce privilege along lines of race, wealth and legacy. **The Slavery Connection** The piece draws on well-documented historical research showing that several of the world's most prestigious universities built their endowments — the investment funds that finance their operations — on profits derived from the transatlantic slave trade. Harvard and Yale in the United States have acknowledged receiving donations from slave traders and slaveholders. In the UK, Oxford and Cambridge (collectively known as "Oxbridge") have faced growing pressure to examine how colonial wealth shaped their physical infrastructure, fellowships and libraries. For many scholars of race, this is not merely a historical footnote. Wealth accumulated through slavery was reinvested into institutions that then gatekept access to education, professions and social status — often explicitly excluding Black and minority ethnic students for centuries. The argument is that this structural advantage compounds over generations. **The Donor Problem** Beyond historical endowments, Dr Nosib points to a more contemporary issue: opaque or "dodgy" donors whose philanthropic gifts come with reputational strings attached. Elite universities have faced criticism for accepting large donations from individuals or organisations with questionable human rights records, or whose giving patterns appear to steer research agendas and admissions priorities. When universities depend heavily on major donors — some of whom belong to racially homogeneous old-boy networks — critics argue the institutional culture tilts in favour of those same demographics, making genuine diversity harder to achieve in practice. **Legacy Admissions: The Hidden Advantage** A central theme in the commentary is the role of "legacy admissions" — the practice of giving preferential consideration to applicants whose parents or grandparents attended the same university. This system, more explicit in the US but debated in the UK, statistically advantages white and wealthy families, since historical exclusion means minority ethnic families are far less likely to have alumni relatives at Oxbridge or Ivy League schools. US courts have recently scrutinised legacy admissions following the Supreme Court's 2023 ruling against race-conscious admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina — a decision that critics say removes one corrective tool while leaving legacy preferences intact. **Why This Matters for Mauritius** Mauritius sends a significant number of students to UK universities each year, including to Oxford and Cambridge, often on government scholarships. Mauritian students from working-class or Creole backgrounds — communities historically marginalised under colonial rule — may encounter these structural barriers most acutely. Dr Nosib's commentary, framed around the ideas of American scholar Dr Ibram X. Kendi, is part of a broader global conversation about whether elite universities can reform from within or whether their founding architecture makes genuine racial equity structurally impossible. **What This Means** For Mauritian families investing in UK university education, the takeaway is clear: a prestigious institution does not guarantee an equitable environment. Understanding how legacy wealth and donor influence shape campus culture — not just admissions statistics — is increasingly important when choosing where to study. Source: Mauritius Times