The Dark & Nasty Underbelly of 2026 England

 

Much has been written and said in the past few weeks about the former Cambridge Professor Jason Arday and especially in the last 48 hours following his apparent suicide. Mr Arday has been described variously as a Walter Mitty character, a fraud, a charlatan, a fantasist, a plagiarist, a liar, a crook, a narcissist and worse following a campaign begun by a disgraced ex-Cambridge academic Nathan Confas and taken up by the right wing press - most notably the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph; the coverage by the Mail has been a classic example of a comment by its owner, Lord Northcliffe many years ago. When asked by a Parliamentary Committee why his newspaper was so successful Lord Northcliffe replied: 'I give my readers a daily hate.' The campaign against Arday has without doubt been a campaign of hate dressed up in self righteous cant and hypocrisy. Now, following Arday's apparent suicide many of his former critics are running for cover, deleting posts, or casting a wider net of blame on to, for example Cambridge University, other institutions with which Mr Arday was associated and, bizarrely, diversity, equality and inclusion programmes and policies.

In the final analysis none of us - and certainly not those responsible for the pernicious public shaming of Mr Arday on social media or on the front pages the national press - yet know the truth of any of this. Perhaps Mr Arday was a plagiarist, or a fantasist. Perhaps, as some suggest, he had some kind of mental health problem. Perhaps he was motivated by dubious intentions as some say. But none of us know. What we do know is that this man has been tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion, a court that draws its conclusions not upon proven facts but upon hear-say, prejudice, unsubstantiated assertions, and on Lord Northcliffe's "daily hate".

Many of Mr Arday's "supporters" suggest that his shaming is rooted in racism - that had he been a white academic accused of plagiarism then the "story" would never have got any further than the dreaming spires of Oxbridge; it would have been a non-story and of no interest to the Mail, the Telegraph or wider social media. Again, I don't know if this has any truth, but in thinking of it I am reminded of a quote by U.S. President Lyndon Johnson: "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best coloured man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.” In the unpleasant and febrile world of England 2026, when issues of immigration, asylum seeking, anti-Muslim (and other "non-Christian" faiths) sentiment is fuelling the national psyche and is implicit in the policies of the Reform and Restore Parties, and much of the Conservative Party the issue of race cannot be dismissed or ignored as a factor in driving public opinion and the unpleasant and often violent actions and events that we have seen on England's streets in recent months. In short for a young black man to be appointed as a Professor at Cambridge seems to have been too bitter a pill to swallow for many. Indeed, Nathan Confas, one of Mr Arday's leading critics was dismissed from his Cambridge position in 2024 for writing that black people are less intelligent than white - it was from that point that Mr Confas began his campaign against the newly installed Professor Arday. Mr Confas may or may not be right in his views and accusations but what cannot be denied is that they have introduced the element of race into the equation and that, it appears to me, has fed into a level of hate that has culminated in the death of a man. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" goes the manifestly untrue old aphorism; words do hurt, and their hurt often lasts longer than broken ones. The hurt of hateful or angry words eats into the mind and the soul, it can be the driver of much anxiety and anger throughout the lives of many people. In Mr Arday's case his vilification and public humiliation, it seems became too much; words do hurt, they cannot be unsaid and when blazed in black and white across the front pages of major newspapers or on every other social media post then they have the potential to kill. Not one of us knows the truth of the allegations and comments about Mr Arday; he has been judged and found guilty not in a Court of Law but in the Court of Prejudiced Hypocrisy. And worse, even after his death posts on social media are mocking and making coarse and crude jokes about this man; "He'll rise after three days and win the Boat Race in a kayak" being one such immature and unpleasant comment. I've heard that sort of thing before from the edge of the playground where the school bullies stand and pick on those younger or weaker than them. England should be ashamed for what is being said by many and doubly ashamed because we are no longer ashamed of things that used to shame us.

I would suggest that all who have jumped on the bandwagon of vengeful condemnation against Mr Ardley when nothing has been proved and, to date, no law broken, should perhaps broaden their world and read the tales of the ancient Greek tragedian Aeschylus - especially his mighty trilogy "Oresteia". The tale is a dire warning of the consequences of hate and vengeance as a means of seeking or handing out "justice", and the tale's outcome is the basis of our modern system of justice - a fair trial rather than continual revenge against those who have offended us. We owe a huge debt to Aeschylus, the ancient Greek who through his tale gave us one of the great cornerstones of our civilisation. Whatever the rights and wrongs, the "crimes" or the fantasies of Jason Arday he has been judged and found guilty by a lynch mob - and that cannot be right nor can it be allowed to go unchallenged.

But, for me there is another dimension to all this - and it's all about context.

If Jason Arday is, indeed, "guilty" of the "crimes" of which he is "charged", if he did "cheat", if he did plagiarise academic research, or lie about things he had done or the life he had lived, is he so very different than many (most?) of us in this modern world?

My wife and I go, two or three times a year, to our favourite hotel - the Langstone Cliff - in Dawlish, Devon. If we walk down to the sea we pass a few shops selling beach items and outside one is a sign advertising their hand printed T shirts each bearing the logo " Old Guys Rule! The older I get the better I was!". I always laugh at this - because deep down I know it's true. Humans naturally impose a narrative structure onto the often random or chaotic events that make up our lives - we do this to make sense of them. Without these constructed meanings—such as finding a moral lesson in a tragedy—the randomness of existence, over which we have little control, would be overwhelming. We all live our lives through the narrative we invent about ourselves; about our childhood, our successes and failures, our career, our relationships and we perceive and tell ourselves and others that tale in such a way that not only makes us feel good but enables us to cope with the reality of life. If, for example, we get fired from our job we tell ourselves and others "It allowed me a different career path". When our grades aren't good enough to get us into our favoured university we make light of this by choosing somewhere else and tell ourselves it will open up a better set of opportunities. Most of us don't beat ourselves up every day because of the many failures and down sides of our daily lives but emphasise the good and better sides; in short we might not lie to ourselves and others but we do paint the best picture possible, we tell our story, the story of how we want it or need it to be. Now as an 81 year old when I tell my grandchildren about events in my life I am very aware that I paint a picture that although factually true also shows me in my best light: "the older I get the better I was!"

And in this increasingly AI/digitally/social media dominated world I would suggest that few of us do not "gild the lily" in some way - albeit sometimes unintentionally; none of us want to appear stupid or ugly or "ordinary"; we want to present to the world our best self. Each time I post something on Facebook I can't deny that I get a small "buzz" when someone "likes" my post; the chemical messenger dopamine in my brain is at work telling me to do this again, I like it. A middle aged neighbour of mine posts AI altered images of herself looking younger and more glamorous and people click the "like" button. All of this, of course, might be fairly harmless but potentially it is not.

We often read of the mental health problems especially of teenagers. Frequently this is attributed to the use and impact of social media. Young people read posts on Facebook or other platforms and it appears to their immature eyes that others seem better looking, live wonderful lives surrounded by fascinating people, have permanently happy families, have a huge following of good looking friends, or are cleverer with more life opportunities......the list goes on. And they look at their own lives, which seem humdrum, ordinary, dull.......and their mental health plummets. We are increasingly living in a world that does not really exist; it's all part of the same package that surrounds the events that have led up to the sad and unnecessary death of Jason Arday.

Or - and here for me is the killer - I wonder how many of those who vilified Mr Arday for his alleged narcissistic fantasies have "LinkedIin" accounts? Here, one can read and see millions projecting not just their image but their "qualifications", their driving career and personal "passions", their unique "talents" and their fevered ambitions in minute, coruscating and dreadful detail; it is saying "Look at me, I'm special, I'm who you need in your business" - in fact not unlike what Jason Arday is accused of. It is a networking site filled with egos, narcissism and much "gilding of the lily". I do not suggest that people tell lies about themselves but I do suggest that - as we all do - it allows people to paint the best picture of themselves, to take small professional events in their lives and make them bigger or more important in order that they are perceived as more employable, better people. Mr Arday was not alone in his alleged quest to be noticed and thought well of. It's all part of the context and the hypocrisy of contemporary English life and the Jason Arday story.

I do not know why Mr Arday appears to have told the tales he did. I do not know if he was wrongly promoted to a Professor at one of the world's great universities. I do not know if he intentionally told lies or whether he was a victim of some condition that made him prone to exaggerating his status or abilities. I do not know if he plagiarised academic theses or ran marathons with broken leg. But, I do know that he is now dead and that he was perniciously and publicly shamed by those who should know better. And further, I do know that none of the things that are alleged about him are necessarily criminal acts. And I wonder? - if the newspaper "hacks" at the Mail and the Telegraph or the thousands who have piled onto social media to cast their shameful comments are so concerned about men who fantasise, tell "lies", are narcissistic or break the law why are they not pouring out their hateful bile upon Boris Johnson who consistently and openly lied to the British electorate or perhaps the President of the United States who is all of those things and more? Could it be that they are intimidated by Johnson or Trump, fearful of a legal action for millions of pounds being brought against them by their lawyers - or is it just easier to wreak their vengeance upon a young academic? Or, worse, is it because this young academic has had the temerity to seek and be appointed to a Professorship at Cambridge and he is black. I hope not, but I fear it might be so.

But, all this apart, in the end a young man is dead - probably at his own hand, either intentionally or in error. And for what? A matter that in the great scheme of things is, to coin a phrase, only of academic interest to a very few people and certainly not worthy of national media coverage that has occurred in recent weeks; it is a dreadfully fabricated piece of hate inspired journalism and rhetoric - the Daily Mail's Lord Northcliffe would be proud. I've never met Jason Arday but deep down think that, for whatever reason, he probably did "gild the lily" to further his career and enrich his CV - but I also know that he did not deserve to die; he did not deserve the opprobrium heaped upon him. His death and the manner in which it was achieved by the haters and the self righteous vengeance seekers lessened us all; it tells us much about 21st century English society. It exposes the dark underbelly of the nation and we should all feel the shame that Jason Arday presumably felt in the last hours of his life. And I am reminded of the powerful words of English poet John Donne speaking across the centuries from his Meditation XVII written in 1624:

"No man is an island,

Entire of itself.

Each is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea,

Europe is the less.

As well as if a promontory were.

As well as if a manor of thine own

Or of thine friend's were.

Each man's death diminishes me,

For I am involved in mankind.

Therefore, send not to know

For whom the bell tolls,

It tolls for thee."

"Each man's death diminishes me, For I am involved in mankind" - Amen to that. The hacks at the Mail and the Telegraph and the vengeance seekers on social media should think on John Donne's words - for perhaps one day they too will suffer the public shaming heaped upon Jason Arday, a young man who, like Icarus, boastfully ignored advice and convention, and chose to fly too near to the sun.