Nathan Cofnas needs to be discarded from the discourse


I have not said anything about the tragic story of Jason Arday, who was accused of plagiarism and after being hounded over it, was found dead later. I have zero tolerance for plagiarism, but an official Cambridge panel cleared his PhD thesis of claims of deliberate plagiarism, so it should have been over then (unintentional plagiarism is still an issue, but ask Doris Kearns Godwin or Stephen Ambrose about that).

What the Kearns and Ambrose cases didn’t have was a thick overlay of racism. Arday had been aggressively harrassed for a long time by a guy named Nathan Cofnas, before the accusations had filtered into British journalism, which treated them much much more seriously and marshaled the public to question the legitimacy of Arday’s work. I don’t know enough about Arday’s discipline to say whether more investigation was necessary, but I am familiar with Cofnas, that fine specimen of Caucasian superiority shown on the right, and I can tell you that if anyone should have been exiled from academe, it was that fucking Nazi.

Cofnas calls himself a “race realist” and promotes “scientific racism”. He got a PhD in philosophy from Oxford in 2020 for a thesis that sounds like evo-psych muddled up with naive philosophy, arguing that morality is rooted in biological predispositions. I’ve got a copy, but haven’t been able to get through the whole thing, and am unfortunately incapable of throwing a pdf against the wall. He promptly got a job at Emmanuel College, and was promptly fired for grossly racist remarks disparaging black people, generically. He was picked up by Ghent University, why I don’t know, racism shouldn’t be a trait on one’s CV that makes them readily hireable. He’s currently suspended from Ghent because he chose to use his academic freedom to launch his campaign against Arday, because he’s black, and Cofnas does not believe black people should be able to do anything outside of sports and entertainment.

He’s now doing the rounds of racist and right-wing podcasts, and recently appeared with Glenn Loury (a black man) and John McWhorter (a black man) to babble about how he’s not really a racist, but because he’s also a spectacularly stupid person, he couldn’t help but fumble his story.

There’s this bit where he’s talking about a science paper about the evidence for directional selection in West Asian peoples, and he let’s slip a few bad beliefs that he desperately tries to talk himself out of the hole he dug.

The Nazis are saying, look, we were right all along. Now they aren’t right, they…they were…they were right that there are…well, they don’t, they say there are like essential fundamental differences between races, which is not true, but there…they said that the left wing establishment that said that all races are exactly the same, uhh, now it’s obvious that the establishment was lying and the establishment has no credibility, which means the Nazis have much more credibility to many people.

No, the left wing establishment, whatever that is, does not argue that all races are exactly the same; which he calls race communism. How could they, when we acknowledge that all individuals are different? And when there are obvious differences in the distribution of physical traits in different populations? Yet somehow this jumped up racist philbro with no comprehension of what population geneticists actually say is happy to claim that now Nazis are more credible.

Let’s hope that Ghent University makes the sensible decision to give this bigoted clown the boot.

Comments

  1. says

    I once had a troll who kept using a similar line, claiming I believed everyone was genetically equal. My whole thing was that individual variation and environmental factors were large enough that claims of genetic differences are hard to prove, to the point I argued it wasn’t even worth the effort: When you’re hiring an individual, you’re hiring that specific individual, not a hypothetical average of their lineage, so his notion of racial differences was beside the issue. Investing in a better education system would have considerably greater and faster benefit than eugenics. He seemed very confused about that notion of people existing as individuals.

  2. raven says

    No, the left wing establishment, whatever that is, does not argue that all races are exactly the same; which he calls race communism.

    One of the things that always strikes me is that the whole idea of races as a category is transitory.

    Populations are always changing, merging and splitting.
    The French that Julius Ceasar conquered weren’t even French. They were Celtic people.

    .1. Multiracial Population: People identifying with two or more races have grown significantly, making up roughly 10% to 11% of the population according to recent census data and estimates.
    and
    .2. Multiracials, people who identify in multiple races, are the fastest-growing racial population in the country (Davenport, Iyengar, and Westwood …

    Right now mixed race hybrids are 10% or so of the US population.
    Mixes are also the fastest growing racial group in the USA.

    That is the real racial realism.
    In a few more generations, a huge proportion or most of the USA will be mixes of various races.

    You see it every day all around you.
    Our Kenyan Black president Obama was actually half white.
    Kamala Harris, is half Indian and half Jamaican.
    The cuckoo VP Vance is married to an Indian woman with 4 kids.

  3. says

    Honesty compels us to re-emphasize the following in our own concise words:
    There are many races. Human society is full of diversity. Obviously, there are biological and cultural differences among the races. It’s an extremely complex issue that CANNOT be simplified into superior and inferior. Any one who tries to do that is a bigoted imbecile.
    And, as PZ pointed out, hounding someone to death (or viciously pushing them to suicide) is criminal.
    Plagiarism is a crime and ai is a thief that mimics intelligence while shuffling words around to try to prevent their output being labeled as plagiarism.

    Thus, we must stipulate that all the hatred, bigotry, murder and thuggery in human society just proves that humanity is, in most cases, a failed experiment.

  4. seachange says

    Race is a social construct. Humanity the species of giant ape is something you can genetically prove with a DNA sequence. He ( and his sources?) is conflating in his head human-race as the ancient name of our species and the silly ways that humans divide ourselves. “Leftists” believe in science which says then that compared to all the other animals our DNA is highly restricted and we are all the same.

    He is sacredly (idiotically fucked uppedly and ignorant) special in his head. His mommy told him so. Therefore all leftist are saying that all races are the same, in his twist.ed lit.tle mind.

    I had this problem speaking to an oik and a yobbo in London. It might be an English-flavored fascist thing.

  5. zetopan says

    raven@2: “The cuckoo VP Vance is married to an Indian woman with 4 kids”
    Shady Vance desperately wants to be someone else. He has changed his name multiple times, and his rise from rags-to-riches in “Hillbilly Eulogy” was totally fictional. His statements before the Idiot Orange Führer was elected, and after, show that he is just a world’s best TOADY contest contestant.
    https://people.com/everything-j-d-vance-has-said-against-donald-trump-his-2024-presidential-election-running-mate-8678397

    Poor Cofnas, no Nobel Prizes for him. Only the idiot Nazis recognize his “jenius” for being an absolutely worthless nobody. But no one important does, and it apparently annoys him to no end. Are these schools doing zero validation on their faculty hires?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_Nobel_laureates
    Genius mathematician Ramanujan was an East Indian, and there is a LONG list of others.

  6. drdrdrdrdralhazeneuler says

    They say that they can’t fire him due to “academical freedom”. And yet, even academia is bound by the rules of thought. There does not appear to be any data supporting his “academical conclusions”, and for this reason, there does not appear to be any reason for protecting his “academical” works from being judged worthless (with consequences for employment), whatever his personal background may be.

    His own behaviour appears to rather poetically disprove any supposed differences between humans of different origins.

  7. John Morales says

    I took a look. The plagiarism issue was the initial thing, but it started the ball rolling.

    The plagiarism was considered ‘reasonable’*, but that was not the end of it: he lied about being a visiting professor, lied about being mute until 11, lied about his charity fundraising, lied about being on television, and copied interview quotes from other academics to paste into his research articles.
    (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Arday)

    So that initial claim snowballed.
    Turns out he was doing a bit of a George Santos, except in academia rather than in politics.

    Still, it was his own choice to kill himself, so one can’t really blame another for it.

    —

    * >Accepting that there were problems with Arday’s supervision, the panel concluded that the similarities between Arday’s thesis and an earlier PhD thesis by another academic were the result of “honest and reasonable error”, not deliberate plagiarism, and were “well within the accepted range of compliance with the academic standards of the time”.[11]

  8. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    In the Infinite Thread, I excerpted threads from disinfo researcher Stephanie Lamy on retired prof David Harris. He has an axe to grind against critical race theory and a history of harassment who was so “concerned” he called various journalists to circulate allegations. Arday filed a police complaint against him. Harris’ buddy Martyn Hammersley escalated to Arday’s head of faculty.

    Oh, she added more after I’d checked.

    Stephanie Lamy:

    I’ve mapped the far-right semantic operation vs. Arday using the 5W1H method [who what how when where why] and 4 phases: conception, dissemination, amplification & transformation IRL. [googledoc spreadsheet]

    It makes the production chain visible—and shows why starting the story with Cofnas misses how this was a racist attack from day 1, in 2023.

    [Excerpt of Who + Dissemination]: Dave Harris circulated the allegations to journals, universities, academics and journalists. Martyn Hammersley joined this circulation and pressed Cambridge for a more systematic investigation. Dave Harris → Jack Grove / Times Higher Education (THE) as early as 2023, then Dave Harris → Tom Williams / THE → Jack Grove in 2025. Jack Grove, David Sanders, Dave Harris and other academics took part in examining/checking the dossier. The material also circulated through the academic grapevine. The last known relay before public exposure: an unidentified male Cambridge academic (James Orr, Robert Tombs?) → Nathan Cofnas, 13 June 2026.

    The attached doc has a tab at the bottom for English.
     
    Stephanie Lamy:

    if you are still harping on about Arday’s behaviour, or alleged misdeads, then you are a slave to far-right propaganda.

    I get that you may have invested considerable time and cognition into “fact-checking” claims. And letting go of that investment in informational ascendancy—after having skimmed his thesis or whatever—may feel disappointing. But Arday is dead. That is the new reality. You can keep litigating the minutiae (grain of sand), or start looking at the bigger picture (the beach).

    Propaganda, is less about the veracity of individual claims than about epistemic authority: who gets to define what is real, what counts as relevant, which questions deserve attention, and when the matter is considered settled.
    […]
    If you are still debating his thesis, then the far-right still owns your attention—even after his death. Keeping you fixated on Arday’s alleged behaviour is how it monopolises attention, controls the frame, and evades scrutiny of how it organised the public lynching of a black academic.

    If you’re interested in how the far right manipulates attention—and specifically what I call the “grain of sand” tactic—I discussed it with Le Monde in 2022, in relation to Russian propaganda surrounding the Bucha massacre. [In French.]

    And if you’re among those who think that being lenient about alleged plagiarism somehow means giving ground to the far right, you still don’t understand how far-right propaganda works. The claims don’t need to be true or false. They need to monopolise your attention and dictate what you think about.

    Attention is a finite resource, and actors are constantly vying for it. How you allocate yours is therefore a political choice—because controlling attention confers the authority to define reality. And that is the endgame of propaganda.

  9. StevoR says

    @2.raven :

    You see it every day all around you.
    Our Kenyan Black president Obama was actually half white.
    Kamala Harris, is half Indian and half Jamaican.
    The cuckoo VP Vance is married to an Indian woman with 4 kids.

    Two of Trump’s 3 wives are economic migrants. Melania was born in part of Yugoslavia that is now Slovenia, Ivana Trump was born in Czechoslovakia now Czechia. Of Trump’s 5 children, four were born to East European Slavic* migrants. The USA infamously has a felon married to a migrant telling others that felons and migrants are bad.

    Hitler famously considered the Slavic “race” inferior and slaughtered many of them in the Shoah (Nazi Holocaust.) Modern racists seem to be just be fine with counting them – and even the Irish and Greeks too (Gasp! Shock!! Horror!!!1ty!) as just “white” because “race” is a bullshit idea with bullshit arbitrary politically convenient categories.

    .***

    @ shermanj – 21st September 2026 at 1:17 pm : “Honesty compels us to re-emphasize the following in our own concise words: There are many races.”

    No there aren’t.

    Race is a social cultural construct and Humanity has no sub-species or “races” in scientific reality.*

    We are all one species with a lot of individual variations and thousands of cultural groups.

    The idea of “races” being superior and inferiror is indeed extremely complex and problematic and those claiming there’s such a thing as racial superiority or inferiority are racist, willfully, ignorant bigots.

    we must stipulate that all the hatred, bigotry, murder and thuggery in human society just proves that humanity is, in most cases, a failed experiment.

    Sorry but no. NOT an “experiment,” We evolved naturally and are a very flawed species that has created some seriously fucked up cultures and false ideas including the fucked up and erroneous idea that there’s “races” and some “racial hierarchy” within our species.

    .* See source : https://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123

    In 1950, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) issued a statement asserting that all humans belong to the same species and that “race” is not a biological reality but a myth. This was a summary of the findings of an international panel of anthropologists, geneticists, sociologists, and psychologists.

    A great deal of evidence had accumulated by that time to support this conclusion, and the scientists involved were those who were conducting research and were most knowledgeable about the topic of human variation. Since that time similar statements have been published by the American Anthropological Association and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, and an enormous amount of modern scientific data has been gathered to justify this conclusion.

    Today the vast majority of those involved in research on human variation would agree that biological races do not exist among humans. Among those who study the subject, who use and accept modern scientific techniques and logic, this scientific fact is as valid and true as the fact that the earth is round and revolves around the sun.

    As that article also notes, racism is very real and obviously wrong.

    PS. Meta – do people prefer this format addressing multiple other commenters preferable to two separate comments addressing each commenter individually?

  10. Militant Agnostic says

    I’ve got a copy, but haven’t been able to get through the whole thing, and am unfortunately incapable of throwing a pdf against the wall.

    Print it out and then you can throw it against the wall.

  11. beholder says

    Humanity has no sub-species or “races” in scientific reality. — @10 StevoR

    Well, technically, Homo includes several species. The other humans besides our subspecies went extinct, unfortunately.

  12. KG says

    CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain@9,

    I disagree with the claim in the passage you quote from Stephanie Lamy, that attention to questions about Jason Arday’s work, or his life and how he presented it, after his death, makes one “a slave to far right propaganda”. Truth is important, and often complicated. It could be true that Arday misrepresented aspects of his work or past, even though it is undoubtedly true that he was hounded to death by racists and an irresponsible press. Does this stricture, in any case, apply to articles that defend him as well as those that attack him? There is a very interesting article in the UK magazine Byline Times September 2026, pp.14-19, which does exactly that, although its main theme lies elsewhere, as the title suggests: “The Race Science Network that Penetrated Cambridge University and Targeted Jason Arday”.

    That article links Cofnas to the online magazine Aporia, “the public-facing arm of the Human Diversity foundation, now known as Polygenic Scores”, to another right-wing online magazine Quillette, to Peter Thiel, and to one Professor James Orr (who Byline Times had looked at in a previous article on his unprofessional – social, political and domicilary, not sexual – relationships with students as well as his links to Thiel) and to cryptobillionaire Ben Delo. The last two have been in the UK news recently. Orr was (when both articles were published) Head of Policy for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party. He has now resigned, along with another close Farage aide, after they were filmed in a “sting” operation, apparently accepting a donation in kind from a supposed American businessman, which would be illegal under UK electoral law, and which is currently being investigated by the police. Belo, even more recently, has given Reform £34 million – which the party may have to return under legislation currently going through Parliament. Both on boasting about Arday and then dropping him, and on Thiel, Orr and their network, Cambridge University has questions to answer.

  13. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    KG @14:

    Truth is important, and often complicated. It could be true that Arday misrepresented aspects of his work or past […] Does this stricture, in any case, apply to articles that defend him

    What if we participate in the manufactured controversy to show that a lynch mob *gasp* lied sometimes?

    From the Google-translated Le Monde article about Russian propaganda:

    Q: Some of the forgeries look ludicrous. Is this a sign of amateurism, or does it mean that highly elaborate forgeries aren’t necessary to distort information?

    The problem is that when we frame things in terms of “true or false,” we forget that these campaigns are designed to distract. The very fact that we’re discussing them demonstrates this. It doesn’t need to be subtle. It just needs to grab attention. And from that perspective, it doesn’t matter if the falsehood is blatant; the objective is achieved.

    Lamy shared this article approvingly.
    What Jason Arday’s death and ‘reputational warfare’ should teach Ireland

    allegations have an asymmetrical relationship with truth. The allegation is shared thousands of times. The correction sits patiently on a website waiting for somebody sufficiently interested to find it.

    […] A sophisticated reputational campaign does not need to invent everything. It needs only to find something. An erroneous citation. An inaccurate biography. An exaggerated achievement. A stupid decade-old tweet. […] Then remove proportion. […] Aggregate. Repeat. Amplify. A posh sounding suit with a large following starts “asking questions”. A newspaper reports that questions are being asked. An institution responds to the coverage by announcing an investigation. Suddenly the investigation itself becomes evidence that the original allegation must have been serious. The campaign manufactures its own legitimacy.
    […]
    when the dossier lands on an editor’s desk. Or in a university president’s inbox. […] Is the allegation true? Who assembled it? Why? What do they believe? Whom else have they targeted? Is the scrutiny remotely proportionate to the alleged wrongdoing? Asking those questions is not refusing to investigate. It is investigating properly.
    […]
    Jason Arday repeatedly said that what was happening to him was racist and ableist. Yet extraordinary energy went into investigating him while considerably less attention was devoted to the ideology, networks and motivations of some of those pursuing him.

    How to Survive the Broligarchy – The killing of a black man

    [Journalist Carole Cadwalladr]: I’m re-publishing an article [in English] by a PhD researcher, Stephanie Lamy […] if you want to understand what actually happened—and crucially, how—it brings a significant new body of evidence to light.
    – – –
    The hunt for Professor Jason Arday began quietly, three years earlier, couched in the civilised codes of scholarly society: a professor who was merely asking questions. […] The Guardian article subjected Arday’s accounts of racist harassment to minute scrutiny, going so far as to check some of them with police and witnesses, and finding discrepancies. But the three-year pursuit initiated by Harris—the quarry, the chase, the context—was entirely absent from the story. Harris briefly appears in the story as a concerned academic.
    […]
    Nathan Cofnas laid out a roadmap to power on his Substack, “How to Take Back Academia”. He was not alone in articulating such a strategy, and the prescriptions tend to look very similar. […] The two-pronged approach—eliminate the Black scholars, platform the “mediocre” white males—is apparent with the support system they enjoy. When Dave Harris had his emeritus status suspended in January 2026, he became a cause célèbre in Britain’s anti-woke ecosystem,
    […]
    Race science, a belief system fundamentally untethered from reality, needs to be received as science. Its proponents crave legitimacy because their very existence depends on it. Without recognition from journalists, universities and the public, they remain what they are: marginal and extremist. […]

    And Arday was an extraordinarily useful object around which to manufacture that authority: a young Black professor at Cambridge, with a remarkable life story, working on racism, sanism and inequality. Make him doubtful enough, and he can be made to carry the weight of a much larger proposition. Perhaps inclusion policies put him there. Perhaps standards were lowered. Perhaps research on racism is itself suspect. Perhaps the people telling us racism structures the academy are precisely the people who do not belong in it. You do not have to prove the whole proposition. You only have to keep the doubt moving. […] “I’m just asking questions” then becomes a posture through which suspicion can be kept moving, alive indefinitely, even in the absence of sufficient evidence, while claiming the credibility of critical thinking. Arday did not have to be proved a fraud. He only had to be made permanently suspect. And with him, everyone who looked like him.
    […]
    online crowds do not merely consume a narrative: they participate in investigating, producing and circulating the material that sustains it. The invitation to go and look for yourself, to check another supposedly outlandish claim, to uncover another discrepancy, was particularly enticing to those who defined themselves as rationalists or sceptics. […] even after Arday’s death, so many of those who engaged with the steady stream of revelations remain invested in fact-checking him to this day, unable to let him go. Even the reasonable minds.

    Kate Starbird has also argued that the answer to information disorder lies “not [in] better facts, but better frames”. Arday was hounded to death. But the frame that made the hunt possible survives

    Stephanie Lamy:

    A question I’m getting a lot now: how do you shift the frame? How do you right the Upside down? There isn’t one and only way. My method comes from years of practice. Including the infamous MacronLeaks [Article link].
    – Focus on chain of custody.
    – Don’t amplify the amplifiers (eg: Cofnas here, Posobiec MacronLeaks).
    – Make the story about the analysis. Go meta. [The best way to kill a disinformation narrative is to “make a Whodunit”.]
    – Preparedness [recognizing known bad actors] (huge fail in the Arday sequence).
    – And know that a propaganda campaign can also use “truths” to keep the doubt moving.

  14. John Morales says

    CA7746, you really don’t like to think for yourself, do ya?

    All you do is quote others’ opinion pieces.

  15. Chakat Firepaw says

    I’ve got a copy, but haven’t been able to get through the whole thing, and am unfortunately incapable of throwing a pdf against the wall.

    A suggested solution to this minor problem: Dump the PDF onto an old thumbdrive that’s about due to be tossed anyway.

Leave a Reply