So the Alma Mater caves, eh?

Adam Perkins, lecturer in the neurobiology of personality at King’s College London, was due to speak on 9 February in the latest of a series of events at the LSE on the welfare state until it was cancelled just days before.
The LSE took the decision because they were “aware of some negative social media activity” related to the talk, the Times Higher Education magazine reported.

Professor Perkins’ work has been attacked for ‘stigmatising’ those in long-term unemployment, as he said “individuals with aggressive, rule-breaking and antisocial personality characteristics are over-represented among welfare claimants”.
His new book, The Welfare Trait, which states his belief that habitual welfare claimants can pass these characteristics on to their children, has also been criticised, with one internet commenter calling this view a “nauseating”.

Wonder if this would work better if expressed in the language of Marxism? Lumpenproletariat?

21 thoughts on “So the Alma Mater caves, eh?”

  1. Hmm I wonder what would happen to an institution if it only allowed one views from one side of the social political debate over the course of a decade or two? What effect would that have on the critical thinking skills of students 🙂

  2. This sounds like common sense to me. Of course nature is not destiny and of course we know that genes pass on, but not always. The difficult questions come when we discuss what is the ethically right thing to do, knowing that Dr. Perkins is right.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    His new book, The Welfare Trait, which states his belief that habitual welfare claimants can pass these characteristics on to their children, has also been criticised, with one internet commenter calling this view a “nauseating”.

    Nauseating is not the same as Not True. What precious little dears Academics have become. Maybe Ecks is right and it is time to close them all down.

  4. we know that genes pass on, but not always

    No. We know that genes always pass on. However nearly all phenotypical traits are dependent on a complex variety of influences – some are genetic (and are usually dependent on a gene complex, which is likely not to be passed on in its entire form), some are other inheritable non-DNA, some are developmental and some are environmental.

    That there might be a genetic component to human pre-disposition to blank-minded idleness is just one of these entirely arguable probably-truths, like inheritability of IQ but, surprisingly, not inheritability of non-norm sexual preference, that winds the SJW crowd up so much.

    Personally, I’d consider the environmental inheritability as more likely to be the most significant cause but, what would I know.

  5. SE

    Yes, I agree with the way you put it – my phrasing was a tad too short and unclear. And nurture does play a role.

    The issue is what we should do about it.

  6. This would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.

    People are against faith schools because of fear of children being ‘brought up in a bubble’.

    But apparently bubbles are just fine as long as they’re of the approved kinds.

  7. So Much For Subtlety

    SE – “Personally, I’d consider the environmental inheritability as more likely to be the most significant cause but, what would I know.”

    Surely it hardly matters whether it is genetic or environmental. We aren’t going to remove children from the feckless and violent. They aren’t about to become Methodists and these days it wouldn’t matter if they did.

    So children will be born with genes and into an environment over which we have no control and little influence.

    We can’t go back to sterilizing people as in Sweden. But perhaps we could opt for another solution – we provide high IQ DNA for potential single mothers? Women have some God given right to have children, apparently. So we tell them that if they get knocked up by their violent men, they are on their own, but if they use state-approved turkey basters, they will get extra welfare. That, at least, would test the DNA theory and it could hardly hurt.

  8. For damn certain Ecks is right.

    If you have institutions that are being (and in many cases have already been) warped to produce a steadily rising tide of leftist evil then guess what?

    If you leave them in business you will get a steadily rising tide of leftist evil.

    Shut down all non-science Uni courses and purge-by-the-sack all the leftist-peddling staff and destroy for life the present gang of Red Guard students before they become the next generation training even worse middle class Marxist scum to come.

  9. My first degree was from Kings. Right now I’m beaming with pride in the place.

    My second degree was from LSE. Right now, rather ashamed.

  10. Some anti-social individuals claim welfare benefits, but that does not mean that all recipients of welfare benefits are anti-social. I think I could explain that to the average five-year-old.
    So how about getting a few five-year-olds to lecture these internet idiots?

  11. Nauseating is not the same as Not True.

    And note the comment didn’t come from a fellow academic, it came from “oneinternet commenter”. Because obviously we don’t get dribbling loons on the internet.

  12. As it happens I’m reading the book at the moment. It’s quite dull because it’s basically a carefully annotated summary of over a century of research.

    None of us, of course, has ever actually met a feckless irresponsible idle scrounger in real life. So if some of them end up on welfare this can only be understood through the lens of modernist dialectical post-materialism and impersonal forces which we cannot control.

    On the other hand, if you choose to study at some shit hole brain swamp like the LSE you have only yourself to blame.

  13. IQ studies often divide effects into inherited and environmental. But it seems that “environment” isn’t the same thing as “nurture”. In fact it looks as if “environment” means little more than that to which we attribute whatever cannot be explained by heredity. In other words it might be mainly noise for all that anyone knows. It’s a rag-bag rather than a concept.

  14. Oh, according to Dr Perkins himself: ““All the LSE staff who helped organise my lecture on The Welfare Trait have been open minded and helpful from the outset,” he said. “Everything went smoothly until the last few days before the event when some threats of disruption were received by some of the organisers. The [philosophy department] leadership team decided more time would be needed to manage the event properly than was available. The postponement decision was not forced on them – in fact not even suggested – by any central LSE body.”

  15. @ bif
    I really do not know whether any of the street beggars I have met are feckless irresponsible idle scoundrels. All the moans I have heard from working class people about their “feckless” neighbours could be class prejudice.

  16. “The [philosophy department] leadership team decided more time would be needed to manage the event properly than was available.” Does no one teach Ethics in that department? Lying sods.

  17. So Much For Subtlety

    dearieme – “Does no one teach Ethics in that department? Lying sods.”

    Nor understand basic honesty? They need to be made to stand in the corner and recite “But still the Turtle Moves” a few thousand times.

    Gutless wonders.

  18. So Much For Subtlety

    Precious Little Dears Part II:

    According to the [Rutgers student newspaper The Daily Targum], students and faculty members held a wound-licking gathering at a cultural center on campus, where students described “feeling scared, hurt, and discriminated against.”
    “A variety of different organizations and departments were present to listen, answer questions and show support” to the apparently weak and vulnerable students, who just a few days prior had disrupted Yiannopoulos’ event by smearing fake blood on their faces and chanting protest slogans.
    One student at the event told the Targum that they “broke down crying” after the event, while another reported that he felt “scared to walk around campus the next day.” According to the report, “many others” said they felt “unsafe” at the event and on campus afterwards.
    “It is upsetting that my mental health is not cared about by the University,” said one student at the event. “I do not know what else to do for us to be heard for us to be cared about. I deserve an apology, everyone in this room deserves an apology.”
    A number of organizations were at the event to offer support to the poor, traumatised students. These included Psychiatric Services, the Office for Violence Prevention and Victim Assistance, and the Rutgers University Police.

    If they weren’t so Right On this would be called homophobia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *