toby young progressive eugenics
Ethics & Morality

Toby Young and our progressive eugenics/equality hypocrisy

The hounding of Toby Young from his appointment to the advisory board of the Office for Students (OfS) has been both unseemly and unjust. The Twitter hordes fulminated about his obsession with with women’s breasts and masturbation, while Labour focused on his “homophobia, misogyny and indifference to the rights of people with disabilities”. A few Tories thought he was damaging the Conservative brand. Robert Halfon MP, Chair of the Education Select Committee, told the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “If we are to stand up as the Conservative party for what is right, we also have to accept when we have made a mistake.”

In the end, it wasn’t Toby Young’s lewd, crude and (frankly) adolescent sexualised tweets which did it for him, but his views about equality and diversity. The Commissioner for Public Appointments explains on his blog:

…the Governance Code requires those holding public office to uphold the Nolan principles of public life, and to act in accordance with Government policies on equality and diversity. But how far back should you go? You don’t want to have a hard and fast rule that says people in public life can never have said or written anything controversial, or unpopular, and, maybe, there should be some kind of practical statute of limitation for the sins of youth and college years. But the nature and general unacceptability of the comments also matters, as well as the more recent timing, and that ultimately did for Mr Young.

The most offensive piece transgressing equality and diversity policy appears to have been a 2015 article – ‘The Fall of the Meritocracy‘ – in which Toby Young examined the research being done on genetically engineered intelligence, in particular by Stephen Hsu, Vice-President for Research and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Michigan State University. Young wrote:

Hsu believes that within ten years machine learning applied to large genomic datasets will make it possible for parents to screen embryos in vitro and select the most intelligent one to implant. Geoffrey Miller, an evolutionary psychologist at New York University, describes how the process would work:

Any given couple could potentially have several eggs fertilized in the lab with the dad’s sperm and the mom’s eggs. Then you can test multiple embryos and analyze which one’s going to be the smartest. That kid would belong to that couple as if they had it naturally, but it would be the smartest a couple would be able to produce if they had 100 kids. It’s not genetic engineering or adding new genes, it’s the genes that couples already have.

It’s worth repeating this last point, because it deals with one of the main reservations people will have about this procedure: these couples wouldn’t be creating a super-human in a laboratory, but choosing the smartest child from the range of all the possible children they could have. Nevertheless, this could have a decisive impact. “This might mean the difference between a child who struggles in school, and one who is able to complete a good university degree,” says Hsu.

My proposal is this: once this technology becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.

As Rob Halfon told the House of Commons, this is indeed “incredibly dark and dangerous stuff”. It certainly wouldn’t do much for the confidence of disabled or working class students if a member of the OfS advisory board were known to have advocated screening them out in vitro, would it?

You know where this is going, don’t you?

There’s probably no need to write any more.

But, for the sake of clarity and the overwhelming urge to hammer the point home…

Parliament permits the screening out of not only disabled foetuses, but of disabled babies right up to the day of their birth. That is progressive eugenics, isn’t it? That disability apparently extends to something as cosmetically trivial a hare lip and cleft palate. That’s progressive eugenics, isn’t it? Some proponents of abortion are looking forward to a world without Down’s. That is progressive eugenics, isn’t it? The current Shadow Secretary of State for Brexit (and former DPP) Keir Starmer refused to prosecute doctors for performing sex-selective abortions. That’s progressive eugenics (at least for some ethnic/religious minorities), isn’t it? No doubt some religions would also screen out homosexual foetuses/babies if sexuality were ever proven to be genetically determined. And no doubt the then DPP would not prosecute those perpetrators either (“not in the public interest”), not least because ‘disability’ appears to be in the eye of the beholder. And that would be progressive eugenics, wouldn’t it?

Toby Young’s progressive eugenics thesis (or his advocacy of it) is indeed abhorrent, but surely it’s preferable to screen out the least intelligent embryos so that at least all future generations might possess the intellectual capacity to grasp glaring inconsistency, blind virtue and stench of feminist self-righteousness which shrouds the murky outworking of UK abortion law. If our ‘civilised society’ may favour the physically perfect and facially beautiful over the disabled and blemished, why not the mentally fittest and intellectually outstanding over the least intelligent? Why differentiate foetuses or babies on the grounds of their sporting prowess but not their IQ? Honestly, why can’t the disabled Chairman of the Education Select Committee – who could quite easily and perfectly legally have been screened out and aborted – see the incredible darkness and danger in this logical disparity and rank hypocrisy?

  • CliveM

    We’d miss you Sarky.

  • Inspector General

    Toby Young is a vile individual. The Inspector has worked in
    the past with vile individuals. They were employed, not for their pleasantness
    of character, of which they possessed not, but for the valid reason they could
    do the job. It is an incredible arrogance to deny employment to odious types,
    is it not!

    However, the thought that there could have been an even
    smarter version of Toby Young around, courtesy ‘progressive eugenics’ fills an
    Inspector with trembling fear and he can only say that if such a horror was
    ever brought to life, it would serve the parents bloody well right…

    Urrrgh…

    • CliveM

      All I would add is the thought of deliberately choosing to cope with the teenage years of someone you’ve deliberately chosen to be significantly smarter than yourself would fill me with dread.

      Parenthood would be impossible!!

  • Sir John Oldcastle

    Hypocrites amongst the assorted lefties running this country? Surely not!!

  • Royinsouthwest

    Isn’t hypocrisy a prerequisite for an appointment to any quango? Is there a single member of the board of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission who is not a hypocrite? If the EHRC was run by men and women of integrity they would have mounted an investigation into the way in which “anti-racism” was used to allow mass rape in many northern towns, most notably Rotherham, and also towns elsewhere.

    If even one member had the integrity to raise the subject and then resign if the others rejected the idea of an investigation then we would have heard about it. The silence of the EHRC shows what a dishonest and morally corrupt organisation it is.

  • David

    I suspect that many on the left would be terrified of seeing their power slip away by the working class being able to produce brighter, more capable children with higher IQs who were not dependent upon them.
    Having said that, as one opposed to abortion in the vast majority of situations, I find this drift towards eugenics totally repugnant.

  • Dolphinfish

    Intelligence is such a nebulous criterion in any event. I know there’s a ton of people out there who adore the concept in the same way Victorian atheists adored Darwin’s theory, because it “proved” they were smarter than everyone else, but it just doesn’t work that way. Intelligence is a bit like pornorgraphy: you can tell it when you see it, but just try defining exactly what it is. To this day, there is no universally accpeted definition for the word, despite IQ tests being around for over a century. And it’s far from clear that it’s an inherent quality. If it were, you would not be able to change your IQ, yet people routinely study these tests and improve their score. Then there’s the question of nurture. Why, for instance, is the average IQ in North Korea five points lower than in the south? Did an arbitrary line on a map raise the intelligence level on one side and lower it on the other? Or has it much more to do with the fact that North Koreans don’t get anything like the nourishment their compatriots in the south do? And can we really consider one man more intelligent than another because he can design an algorithim for a computer programme when he has to call out the AA to change a tyre for him?

    • Sarky

      You’re confusing intelligence with common sense. In my experience intelligent people have no common sense.

      • Anton

        Is it inteligent to believe in God or common sense, or both?

        • Sarky

          Now there’s a question…

        • Sybaseguru

          It takes more intelligence than anyone has had so far to explain what caused the universe to come into existence. Unless of course you consider a definition that sounds remarkably like God

          • Einstein, it seems, was a pantheist.

            “I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal god is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervour is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.”

            “In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views.”

            “I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvellously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza’s Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.”

            “Scientific research can reduce superstition by encouraging people to think and view things in terms of cause and effect. Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality and intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order. […] This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God. In common parlance this may be described as “pantheistic”” (Spinoza).

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein#Pantheism_and_Spinoza's_God

          • Anton

            No, he was a Deist. He firmly believed in an intelligence behind the laws of nature but never said anything to suggest that he believed this Intelligence had any interest in man. He describes his beliefs as those of a Deist in the last paragraph but then calls himself a Pantheist which is something else. He may have been unaware of the category of “Deist”.

          • dannybhoy
          • Perhaps he was a pantheistic-deist.

          • Chefofsinners

            He sounds a bit thick to me.

          • Anton

            It suits our scientific age to regard him as a great human being because he was a great physicist. This is not a view I share.

          • Chefofsinners

            Indeed. Our age follows the moral pronouncements of Gary Lineker because he was good at kicking a bag of wind around a field. It is no less stupid to follow Einstein because he could do physics.

        • The Snail @/”

          It is certainly lacking in imagination to say there can’t be one!

          • Sarky

            And a bigger imagination to consider a universe without one

          • Chefofsinners

            The true mark of intelligence is faith.

          • Sarky

            Faith is an unreliable road to truth.

          • Chefofsinners

            Faith begins with a recognition of how inadequate the human intellect is.
            The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

          • Sarky

            Interesting. You have to be fearful of a so called loving god.

          • Chefofsinners

            ‘Fear’ in this context means respect, reverence and humility. But yes, God loves good and hates evil. It is a fearful thing to face Him as judge rather that saviour.

          • Sarky

            Like a supernatural simon cowell.

          • Chefofsinners

            You mean Simon Cowell isn’t supernatural?

          • Not bigger but barmier, baser.

          • Sarky

            How?? To look to the stars and want to know how it all works and to then create the technology to do it takes more imagination than looking to the stars and saying ‘god did it’.

          • To look at the stars and imagine they just happened reveals a mind so blinded by rebellion against its Creator it will believe anything rather tha what stares it in the face.

          • Sarky

            Its not me who is blinded.

          • DespiteBrexit

            Not mutually exclusive. Indeed, scientific endeavour can be encouraged by the idea that there is a behind-the-scenes intelligence imposing an order which can be discovered and described in a coherent fashion, rather than a series of random accidents.

      • Dolphinfish

        You’ve just had your first experience of trying to define intelligence.

      • And some even shop at Poundland.

        • Sarky

          Why oh why oh why

      • IanCad

        Although not mutually exclusive, it does seem both attributes are lacking in those deemed “Intelligent.” I would submit that most intelligent children tend to be only good at learning and passing exams; little creativity is required. Those who have both gifts – mark them well.

        • CliveM

          Probably correct but that’s a failing of the education system and not the children.

        • What the Bible commends is not intelligence but wisdom, not knowledge but love. And the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom while love does not puff up but build up.

  • It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies—Young

    Given the scale of physical and mental disability suffered by children of consanguineous marriages in the Muslim community, in vitro screening for intelligence would be as pointless as treating cancer with a sticking plaster. Back in 2011, the Daily Mail reported: ‘While British Pakistanis account for three per cent of the births in this country, they are responsible for 33 per cent of the 15,000 to 20,000 children born each year with genetic defects…These include blindness, deafness, blood ailments such as sickle cell anaemia, heart or kidney failure, lung or liver problems and myriad complex neurological or brain disorders.’

    The long-term chances of an increasingly Muslim Britain remaining an intelligent ‘advanced’ society are pretty much zero. Pakistani professor Pervez Hoodbhoy, interviewed by Der Spiegel in 2013:

    Es gibt rund 1,5 Milliarden Muslime in der ganzen Welt—aber sie können in keinem Bereich eine substantielle Errungenschaft vorweisen. Nicht im politischen Bereich, nicht in gesellschaftlicher Hinsicht, weder in den Naturwissenschaften noch in der Kunst oder in der Literatur. / There are around 1·5 billion Muslims in the world, but they cannot point to a substantial achievement in any field. Not in politics, not socially, not in the sciences or art or literature.’

    • Inspector General

      It is a most interesting thing, JR, that ignorant lesser peoples
      not just tolerate but embrace interbreeding.

      Indisputably very prevalent in Islamic countries. One holds
      the opinion that it was more than likely forced on them. As Islam spread out
      with migration (with or without the absence of war) and the prophet’s people
      began terrorising the indigenous they came across in line with the wishes of
      Allah and his Koran, they had no choice in the matter. Marry someone who shared
      up to all eight of your own grandparents or die out.

      Of course, academics (or Carl) could never admit to the validity of that hypothesis! It’s just not allowed…

      • @ IG—Interbreeding continues to be embraced. A piece summarizing a 2005 Newsnight report says that cousin marriage ‘remains so popular because the community believes there are real benefits to marrying in the family. Many British Pakistanis celebrate cousin marriage because it is thought to generate more stable relationships.’

        • Dreadnaught

          As you well know, that is what they want people to believe; its all about property and keeping it in the family.

      • Anton

        You have it the wrong way round, Inspector. Much more likely is that interbreeding peoples are lesser-achieving peoples. The explanation is a simple consequence of genetics.

        If the peoples of Europe were to take up widespread cousin marriage then they too would suffer just as badly; and if the peoples among whom cousin marriage is common were to give it up then their genetic health would improve dramatically in just one generation.

        Where cousin marriage is widespread, the reason is to keep wealth within the family. (I am not aware that it is demanded in the quran; can you give the verse?) The authorities in mediaval Europe prohibited it, however. Those Christian authorities did the right thing for the wrong reason, as their motivation was not genetic health but to be more pious than the Jews whose law permitted it but whom they despised.

        • “Those Christian authorities did the right thing for the wrong reason, as their motivation was not genetic health but to be more pious than the Jews whose law permitted it but whom they despised.”

          Care to substantiate that assertion?

          It’s a daft as claiming that cousin marriage was banned by the Pope Saint Gregckory I in an attempt to prevent the accumulation of wealth and power within families to avoid competition for the Church’s power.

          In early Roman times marriage of cousins was not allowed and marriage between uncle and niece was also unlawful. The Church recognised the prohibitive legislation of the Roman State and extended the impediment of consanguinity beyond the limits of the civil legislation.

          So why did the Church ban marriage to first cousins? It most certainly was not hatred of Jews!

          The welfare of the social order, according to St. Augustine (City of God XV.16) and St. Thomas (Suppl. Q. liii, a. 3), demanded the widest possible extension of friendship and love among all humankind, to which desirable aim the intermarriage of close blood-relations was opposed; this was especially true in the first half of the Middle Ages, when the best interests of society required the unification of the numerous tribes and peoples which had settled on the soil of the Roman Empire. By overthrowing the barriers between inimical families and races, ruinous internecine warfare was diminished and greater peace and harmony secured among the newly-converted Christians.

          In the moral order the prohibition of marriage between near relations served as a barrier against early corruption among young persons of either sex brought habitually into close intimacy with one another; it tended also to strengthen the natural feeling of respect for closely related persons (St. Thomas, II-II.154.9; St. Augustine, City of God XV.10). Nature itself seemed to abhor the marriage of close kin, since such unions are often childless and their offspring seem subject to grave physical and mental weakness (epilepsy, deaf-muteness, weak eyes, nervous diseases), and incur easily and transmit the defects, physical or moral, of their parents, especially when the interbreeding of blood-relations is repeated.

          http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04264a.htm

          [You sure you’ve got a copy of New Advent? If you have, then use it]

          It’s extra-biblical, of course. So much for sola scriptura! The Bible doesn’t forbid marrying one’s cousin. Leviticus 18 lists the forbidden relationships and cousins are not forbidden nor is cousin marriage forbidden anywhere else in the Bible.

          • Anton

            …which is part of what I said: cousin marriage is permitted to Jews. Back then, of course, in an agricultural community without modern transport and with a far smaller population, the range of spouses for any individual was very small. God permitted divorce because of human hardness of heart according to the NT, and this might have been another concession to poor human practice.

            Einstein’s theory of relativity is extrabiblical but I believe that too!

            The mediaeval church forbade marriage up to several cousins out (but made exceptions for the aristocracy). I remember well reading mediaeval comments to the effect that this was one up on the Jews. Where I am this week I do not have access to my usual resources, but this is a start:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affinity_(canon_law)

          • No, you said:

            “Those Christian authorities did the right thing for the wrong reason, as their motivation was not genetic health but to be more pious than the Jews whose law permitted it but whom they despised.”

            There’s nothing Jack can find about the Church’s position being based on despising the Jews! That was just an anti-Catholic slur. As the Gospel spread, marriage between different Christian tribes and peoples promoted social order and greater morality between family members.

            The theory of relativity doesn’t concern itself with morality, the common good or natural law, so it not being mentioned in Scripture is neither here nor there.

          • Anton

            Yes, I reckon what I said is the main reason. Why should I trust Rome’s own explanaton of its motivation? It set aside its own rules for the aristocracy often enough.

          • That’s says more about you than the Church.

          • Anton

            You have certainly educated me to one thing: Be wary of those who spell ‘church’ with a capital C. Ecclesiolatry!

          • It’s a question of grammar when one is talking about the one true Church. The Catholic Church being the true Church of Jesus Christ. Funny how most protestants tend to use “one true church”. The Church is both a visible, earthly structure as well as the Mystical Body of Our Lord.

          • Anton

            The church of Jesus Christ is simply the collective of all genuine believers in Him. As such it has certain charcteristics, but that is what it IS.

      • IrishNeanderthal

        Are you confusing interbreeding and inbreeding?

        There is an occasionally used word intrabreeding which refers to breeding within the confines of one population.

    • Mike Stallard

      Ja, aber zumindest schätzen die Muslime immer noch die Ehe.

      • @ Mike Stallard—Yes, the enemies of white Christian societies knew they had to break our attachment to marriage and the traditional family. The children’s books featured in this Tweet are by the same author.

  • Let’s be honest. Toby Young is a ridiculous man and many of his past Tweets are repugnant and a disgrace to common decency. Most were written when he was in his 40’s. Whoever nominated and approved his appointment should also resign for bringing the government into disrepute.

    That said, in terms of eugenics, he merely spoke the unspeakable and exposed where the trajectory of the abortion industry is inevitably headed. Remember, both artificial contraception and abortion have their roots in the eugenics movement of the 1920’s and were aimed at the “working classes” and poor.

    • Jilly

      I must disagree. He is not ridiculous.
      He certainly has said much in extremely bad taste and brought misfortune upon himself by self-sabotaging behaviour. In the past. He admits as much.
      His book ‘How to lose friends and alienate people’ is a good example – published in 2001. His own reputation is the only one he has seriously damaged.
      A close relative works with him on the Free Schools project as a result of which thousands of disadvantaged children have the chance of a quality education they would not have had under the old regime. Toby is driven by a desire for kids to have the best chance in life. My relative rates him as very impressive and likes and respects him greatly.

      You mention bad behaviour in his 40s – he admits he was a ‘journalist provocateur. Some people take longer to mature than others.
      If we were all to be judged by stuff we said and did when young and foolish few would be respected. He, unlike many contemporary politicians, is being judged harshly on his past. Is there no room for redemption?

      He would have been good at the university job. Not many are able to stand up to the left wing Blob which is poisoning education. Toby undoubtedly would have brought a lot of good to it.

      • That’s certainly a different perspective and Jack will withdraw the accusation of “ridiculous”. Nevertheless, “journalist provocateur” or not, in Jack’s opinion, his offensive comments about women and disabled people render him unsuitable for public service and his name should never have been put forward.

        • Jilly

          Public service… where a senior politician endorses calls to lynch an
          opponent, where anti Semitic language is rife among a group of MPs, where there appears to be immunity given to murderers and warmongers, an MP calls his secretary ‘sugart*ts’ and gets her to buy sex toys and is cleared by the Standards Committee… for starters. There is more disgusting language than Toby used heard from ‘upstanding members of the community’ who get away with it. Standards in public life are not high.

          • “Whataboutery” is no defence.

          • Mike Stallard

            Silly Jilly. Mr Vaz is in charge of parliamentary morals. He will not allow one shred of immorality to take place. And it is complete nonsense that Diane Abbott got the job because she was Mr Corbyn’s ex.

      • Mike Stallard

        When I was starting a free school in our town, Toby Young very graciously replied to my queries and was very helpful indeed. He is a decent and professional person who really cares about children. Compare him with a true liberal thinker like Ms Batmangelidgh.

        • Jilly

          Absolutely. The Left is very happy to have claimed his scalp.

    • pobjoy

      ‘Some of Sodalitium’s victims had denounced the Vatican’s handling of the case, saying the six-year delay in taking any action, and subsequently allowing Figari to live in retirement in Rome, was anything but satisfactory.’

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/10/vatican-catholicism-peru-pope-francis

      • And they are correct. For all his talk of “zero tolerance” concerning clerical child sexual abuse, Pope Francis has achieved very little and behaves in ways Jack finds difficult to comprehend.

        • dannybhoy

          “Pope urged to apologise for Vatican castrations”
          https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/aug/14/humanities.highereducation

          (in a very high voice)
          “Whaddya think of that Jack?”

          • Apologise for what? These boys were accidentally castrated by falling from horses or by animal bites, surely.

          • dannybhoy

            certainly something was nibbling at them..
            “The last recorded castrato.”

          • Chefofsinners

            Didn’t know you believed in the rupture.

          • Sarky

            Thats nuts.

          • …. or not, as the case maybe.

        • pobjoy

          Difficult to comprehend? What would be difficult to comprehend would be the Vatican changing the habits, and fruits, of 1700 years.

  • That rules Carl Jacobs out then ….

  • carl jacobs

    The problem of “screening for intelligence” is that it creates the potential for an Übermensch. The Progressive isn’t so worried about screening for Downs Syndrome and other genetic defects because 1) he isn’t a member of those groups 2) he doesn’t really want to deal with those groups (seeing as they puncture his self-image of invincibility) and 3) because in his perception they exist below him on the social hierarchy.

    But Engineered Intelligence means something has been created above him on the social hierarchy. It’s a group of which he is not a member, and it’s also the group he thinks is naturally entitled to rule. So he sees this as reducing him to the status of natural servant.

    Progressive morality is self-referential morality. Aborting downs syndrome children pleases the self. Creating a more intelligent master class? Not so much. The Progressive is the master class, you see.

    • Merchantman

      The self proclaimed ‘Brights’ don’t yer know.

    • Chefofsinners

      Superior intelligence definitely deserves an ubermenschion.

  • Afternoon Carl.

    • carl jacobs

      It’s morning.

      • Yes, well, Americans are behind us Europeans in many things.

        • carl jacobs

          We aren’t behind you. We are to the West of you. There is a difference.

          To my way of thinking, we arrived exactly when we could in 1941. And we arrived way too early in 1918 because I don’t think we should have arrived at all.

          • Nah. You’re behind the times, whatever way you look at it.

          • Chefofsinners

            You are both to the East and the West of us, as we are of you. Jack, of course, is 500 years behind both of us.

  • Anton

    He said several things similar but this is not at his Wikiquote page:

    https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein

    Search for “imagination” on this page. Einstein is probably the most misquoted figure of the age.

  • The Snail @/”

    The trouble is, that it is not the most intelligent who are the most loving or moral people. To have a genius who is a morally, wicked, monster would be the ultimate nightmare. This is evolution by Human selection, the survival of whom flawed humanity would see as perfect.- making children in our idea of perfection.

    • Mike Stallard

      One of the most unpleasant experiences of my teaching career was working in a school for highly gifted children. Selfish, spoiled brats. No consideration for each other. No consideration for the damage their little tongues were doing. Yuck! A world of such people fills me with disgust.

  • gadjodilo

    Can they select the embryos who will develop into people who want to be plumbers, look after elderly folk, and pick fruit? I think our universities are already stuffed with ‘intelligent’ types,and often to no good effect.

    • dannybhoy

      are already stuffed with “wannabe intelligent’ types..

      • gadjodilo

        I believe It’s called ‘The University Experience”, Danny, and parents apparently want their kids to have it. And there are probably stronger intoxicants than drink there these days. 30k in debt and, in many cases, a piece of paper that won’t get you a job. I’m not knocking it per se, but I just think that these days there’s a lot more of it than society needs.

        • dannybhoy

          I quite agree, but it was your mate Tony Blair who thought it a jolly good wheeze to get more young people off the unemployed registers and into full time educashun…
          We Brits if left to our own devices have always been on the lazy side.
          Always ready to coast along.. preferring prestigious office work to grubby handed manual work.
          So what young person wouldn’t jump at the chance of a life at uni studying football chants or doing media studies? It was a con.

          • gadjodilo

            Hi Danny. Like many other Britons I did originally think that The Blair Creature would be good for the country (though I don’t know what I’ve said here to suggest that I think he’s my mate….); also like many other Britons I was later disabused of this idea.

            Many countries on the continent had by that time a culture of racking up enormous student debts for no good reason, so Blair probably thought that it would, yer know, be great to be more like them.

            Everybody’s potentially lazy, I guess. The upwardly-mobile do often disparage skilled, manual work, which is a shame, and is something the current UK government may finally be addressing.

          • dannybhoy

            That was a windup.
            You know that the Germans copied our apprenticeship system and went on to develop it so that they always had a pool of skilled workers?
            We of course threw it away and instead continued developing that industrial “them and us” divide which has served us so well, to the point where by dint of sheer bloody mindedness we finally rid ourselves of our industrial base…

          • gadjodilo

            Ok 🙂
            No, I didn’t know that about the Germans. Well, I guess many factors could be blamed for the industrial decline of Britain, and most of them hurt the brain.

          • dannybhoy

            Yes mine was a broad brush condemnation, but there is no doubt that narrow minded attitudes encouraged by union leaders with sometimes suspect agendas hastened the breakup of our manufacturing base.

          • gadjodilo

            If British Leyland is typical, a very small number of far-left activists seemed to have a disastrous effect on the lives of workers, most of whom probably wanted just to feed their families. Apparently ‘Red Robbo’ went on to sell The Morning Star and to teach trade union studies, and I’m guessing never faced up to the consequences of his actions.

          • dannybhoy

            “have a disastrous effect on the lives of workers, most of whom probably wanted just to feed their families.”
            Danny has a little experience of unions. and the real problem was that those workers couldn’t be bothered to attend elections and left it all to the left wingers to take up control. That’s laziness.
            Other times you would see on the spot meetings where workers were invited to express their thoughts and opinions, and down would go the heads, and ‘shuffle’ would go all the feet; then afterwards the moaning would start.
            It’s a British cultural thing. You see it in Christian circles too..

          • gadjodilo

            That’s an interesting comment. I’ve never been in a union or on a church committee (though if the rumours about the one at our church are to be believed then the two are not dissimilar).

            PLEASE don’t start referring to yourself in the third person or we’ll start thinking you’re Happy Jack’s alter ego 😉

          • dannybhoy

            Yerss..
            I gotta watch that, does funny things to my head sometimes..
            (from The Shining)
            “Here’s Daaaanny!”

          • dannybhoy

            I have experience as a town councillor, member of our parochial church council, various committees, and I lead an all lady home group.
            As somebody said somewhere, “I know of what I speak..”

          • gadjodilo

            Impressed! The ‘all lady home group’ intrigues me though – I’d always assumed that you ‘identified’ as a XY-chromosomed biological male-type person.

          • dannybhoy

            I am.
            But having lived in community and worked with women quite a lot, my gentler side is coming along nicely. We could talk handbags if you like..
            I’d like some blokes to join the group, but the group is growing slowly, and I hope it’s only a matter of time ’til we have some fellows join, then I can think (as the Lord directs) about splitting into two. I hope so, and the second group will probably be led by a woman..

          • gadjodilo

            So it’s not exactly an ALL lady home group, then.

            I get to talk handbags all the time: In my adoptive country I’m forced to socialise mostly with my wife and her friends.

            I hope some blokes join your group. But does the Lord direct that men be led by women and women by men, or would that just be because you don’t have a second male leader?

          • dannybhoy

            No, no no monsewer, I haven’t got another guy I could even encourage in leadership.
            I have two very capable ladies who could lead a group, but I guarantee that if some chaps came along, the women would prefer to defer to the men.
            Problem is that there’s a lot of wimpy (sorry, soft and gentle), type blokes in churches these days, and few want to take on a leadership role..
            I initiated our group as part of our church’s Committed to Growth programme. My wife started up a Messy Church which in its present incarnation is known as “Young Explorers.”
            My wife’s lovely.

          • gadjodilo

            Ok. I wasn’t judging your group, just curious. The women sound great!

            What’s a Messy Church? This concept has not yet reached our neck of the woods.

          • dannybhoy

            https://www.messychurch.org.uk/about-messy-church
            It’s fine for kids with a relatively stable background, but not so good for kids from broken/dysfunctional ones..

          • Sarky

            My youngest has been to a couple.

          • dannybhoy

            Mmm, we now have ‘Young Explorers’ after school for an hour. We also go into school once a week to hear the children read. It’s amazing how many of them look forward to it. We have 20+ each time.

          • gadjodilo

            It looks good! Didn’t see Lionel Messi anywhere, but I suppose that was too much to hope for. I used to help out with the Boys Brigade once upon a time and the structure of that seemed to function well, though the number of lads dwindled. What’s going on here also looks good.

          • dannybhoy

            Well, I had a couple of years with Jewish Lads and Girls Brigade, that was great fun too. Of course I was a lot younger and more agile then.

          • gadjodilo

            ‘Jewish Lads’ is a Messianic Judaism association, or connected with a synagog?

          • dannybhoy

            Not exactly, it’s just the Jewish equivalent of the Boys Brigade.
            http://www.jlgb.org

          • gadjodilo

            Ok. So did you convert from Judaism to Christianity? Or have I misunderstood something? ☺

          • dannybhoy

            No, I worked for a Jewish organisation for a few years, but I’m not Jewish.
            I’m doing a “This is your Life” feature next month. It’ll all be in there…

          • gadjodilo

            Ok. Where will the This Is Your Life feature be? ‘Here? Or you have your own blog?

          • dannybhoy

            That were meant to be a joke, Gadget.
            What part of the UK are you from originally?

          • gadjodilo

            Ok, you got me. I’m from all over. Off to sleep now.

          • Chefofsinners

            And what is your group called? Dannybgirls? The Solomon Project? I know… Banana Harema?

          • dannybhoy

            Tres Exotique Chef..
            But just ‘home group’

          • dannybhoy

            I prefer male company, especially yer intelligent working man’s company..
            but I like, respect and admire women. It’s just the undertones make me uncomfortable.. :0)

          • IanCad

            And your wife is all square with that Danny??!!

          • dannybhoy

            What, me leading an all lady group? Well she’s in the group anyway, and most are elderly enough that I can give them a hug and a holy kiss on the cheek. Consider that some are widows and don’t see much of other people. We do this in The Peace also. Human contact is both healing and comforting..

    • Mike Stallard

      Hey! These are jobs for immigrants!

      • Ray Spring

        Plumbers, drainlayers, sewage treatment station operators. These people are at the forefront of Public Health. We employ immigrants in these jobs at our peril. They have to be well qualified and awake to problems.
        An example of possible trouble is people fitting water heating systems which are operated by air-conditioners. They will kill people. (Hot water has to be heated to over 55 degrees Celsius).

        • IanCad

          Is this a UK thing? A T&P valve is all that’s required.

          • dannybhoy

            T&P?

          • IanCad

            Temperature and pressure relief valve.

          • worrywort

            The T & P valve is a safety device only. the problem with the UK is gas appliances and unvented hot water systems must be installed by a qualified Plumber. However anyone can purchase these. I have had hundreds of dodgy installations done by Asian Landlords who call me when the thing doesn’t work. I could keep a pub entertained all night with stories.

          • Ray Spring

            Which underlines the serious nature of handing over our first line Public Health defense to immigrants. Stuff has to be correctly installed. It is not if the chap putting the stuff in does not know what the regulations are. Bluntly, immigrants should be banned from any public health work. Sewage, plumbing, electrics, etc.

      • gadjodilo

        Absolutely! While the British exercise their right to be Media Studies graduates on the dole!

  • Nasal irrigation, Carl?

    • carl jacobs

      No, just an involuntary reaction to something I read that was really really funny.

      • As Philip Lawler puts it in his soon to be released book: “Every day I pray for Pope Francis. And every day (I am exaggerating, but only slightly), the pope issues another reminder that he does not approve of Catholics like me.” (Lost Shepherd: How Pope Francis is Misleading His Flock)

        • pobjoy

          Is Jorge Bergoglio the Vicar of Christ?

          • Yes, he is.

          • pobjoy

            How is it that Christ has achieved very little and behaves in ways Jack finds difficult to comprehend?

          • He isn’t Jesus!

          • pobjoy

            Then who is he?

          • The Vicar of Christ.

          • pobjoy

            The word ‘vicar’ means ‘representative’, someone who acts in the stead of another. So how is it that the representative of Jesus has achieved very little and behaves in ways Jack finds difficult to comprehend?

          • A representative of Jesus still remains human and sinful and can be misguided. Being Pope doesn’t mean one is sinless. Read the Parables of Jesus.

          • pobjoy

            A representative of Jesus still remains human and sinful

            So when Jesus said, “On this Rock I will build my church” he allowed for rather friable sandstone, not granite?

          • gadjodilo

            Maybe a ‘mélange’ of different rock types, knowing St. Peter; and up to the 6th century the Pope was called “Vicar of the Chief of the Apostles” (Vicarius Principis Apostolorum), i.e. St. Peter. His title was then switched for some reason to “Vicar of Christ” (Vicarius Christi).

          • pobjoy

            Maybe a ‘mélange’ of different rock types

            Who would join a church built on a mélange?

          • Not at all. He guaranteed the Church would be guided by the Holy Spirit and remain free of doctrinal error until His return – despite the peccability of man.

          • pobjoy

            He guaranteed the Church would be guided by the Holy Spirit and remain free of doctrinal error until His return

            Assuming that is true, how is it that the Holy Spirit seems to behave in ways Jack finds difficult to comprehend?

          • Pope Francis is not the Holy Spirit.
            God writes straight in crooked lines.

          • pobjoy

            Pope Francis is not the Holy Spirit.

            Would Jorge Bergoglio approve of one of his followers attempting to force those not his followers to call him ‘Pope Francis’?

          • No idea.

          • pobjoy

            And yet, he’s your father.

          • dannybhoy

            Oh come on Jack, you’re saying that our Lord entrusted the Gospel and the building of God’s kingdom in earth to the Catholic Church, endorsed it, made it infallible etc.
            But then you’re saying that although Popes can order the persecution, torture and murder of heretics or enemies of the Church, they are just as fallible just as prone to making mistakes as us ordinary sinners!
            That’s called covering all the bases so that even when you’re wrong you’re right; with God’s blessing

          • The Church is guaranteed doctrinal indefectibility and infallibility – not that its individual Popes will be free from error in spiritual or temporal matters. So, yes, God had indeed covered all the bases.

  • dannybhoy

    Something for him to cling onto…

  • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

    There was a BBC4 programme on George Bernard Shaw the other evening. I watched it to see what the BBC – and presenter Gabriel Byrne – would make of the old monster. Yes, we got his passion for socialism, equality, rights for women, naturism and vegetarianism, we even got a mention that he was a supporter of Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin, though an academic was instantly wheeled on to say ‘Yes, he made a mistake, but this should not overshadow the many good things he did. What was NOT mentioned was Shaw’s passion for eugenics. He believed only those ‘useful to society’ had a right to live whilst the weak and feeble minded did not. He believed they should be humanely gassed, and therefore saw nothing wrong with what Hitler and Stalin got up to. Beatrice Webb was of the same ilk: when presented with evidence of Bolshevik mass-murder, she opined that ‘You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.’ Lovely people – both Fabians. Has the labour Party ever apologised for this murky part of their history? No…they have not.

    • David

      Truly chilling !

    • Owl

      a bit like the monster apologising for Dr. Frankenstein Mrs P.

    • IrishNeanderthal

      “MOST people either say that they agree with Bernard Shaw or that they do not understand him. I am the only person who understands him, and I do not agree with him.”

      Introduction to George Bernard Shaw, by G.K.Chesterton.

    • Chefofsinners

      I watched with interest. A relative was his favourite actress and watching her always brings back happy memories. She had the decency to find him embarrassing.

    • gadjodilo

      I used to go to the theatre a lot when I was younger and the one playwright whose plays I couldn’t abide was Shaw. Right-on avant la lettre; art written to an agenda. I didn’t know about his fascination with eugenics but it doesn’t surprize me. Apparantly a 1946 Life magazine article observed that Shaw had “always tended to look at people more as a biologist than as an artist”.

    • Brian

      ‘Yes, he made a mistake, but this should not overshadow the many good things he did.”
      That sounds remarkably like His Present Grace Justin Welby on the monstrous crimes of Bishop George Bell.

      • DespiteBrexit

        You have evidence of these “monstrous crimes”?

        • Brian

          Yes – an old lady whom I don’t know claimed this or she would sue.
          This is called “Irony”.

    • grutchyngfysch

      But that is fully explicable. When the right reveals their hidden desire for eugenics it is because they hate the poor and revel in causing destruction to the innocent. Parties at the Spectator are basically just top hats kicking workers for the fun of it. The Tories are evil.

      When the left desires eugenics it is because they are fundamentally beneficent. They desire the good of every aborted foetus. It is horrid and wicked to suggest that there is any equivalency between the two: everyone knows that Labour is a champion for equality and social justice.

    • The Snail @/”

      Bernard Shaw was approached by a well known actress. She said to him that it would be a good idea if they produced children – on the basis that, if they had his brains and her body they would be perfect. Shaw declined saying that the alternative could be equally likely, that the child would have her brains and his body – a disaster.

  • Toby Young has gone, the Junior Minister who appointed him has been moved with a view to managing him out next time, and the Cabinet Minister is off to the backbenches. Jo Johnson may have been wrong to suggest that Twitter went back to the 1980s, but the trends that have come to a head in this case do go that far back, with roots that stretch even deeper into the past.

    It is not just a matter of being permitted to be as obnoxious as you please, provided that you are posh enough, although there is that. It is not just a matter of being given paid public appointments based on being people’s mate rather than any qualification for the job, although there is that, too.

    It is the deep ideological split between those who see “progressive eugenics” as an acceptable or even a compulsory opinion, such as Toby Young, and those who most certainly do not, such as my erstwhile editor for The American Conservative, and now Deputy Editor of The Spectator, Freddy Gray, who had to try and defend Young on yesterday’s Daily Politics, but who, to his credit, barely attempted to do so.

    This is a Mel Bradford moment, the occasion of a split as deep, and as deeply rooted, as that between the neoconservatives and the paleoconservatives. A split, in fact, not unrelated to that one. This time, though, the neocons have lost. Freddy Gray for the job that is now vacant? Why ever not? Or what is Stuart Reid doing these days? Then again, they could always co-opt the paleocon-friendly Left in the person of someone like Neil Clark, bypassing both the municipal Labour Right in education, and the Liberal Establishment in academia and the media.

    • CliveM

      You’ve been flogging this over various sites, not paid by Labour HQ are you?

  • Dodgy Geezer

    …My proposal is this: once this technology becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility…

    Because you would be creating a generation of children divorced from their parents?

    And because there is probably a reason for the genetic diversity that currently exists in society, and fiddling with it sounds dangerous to me. Remember Aldous Huxley’s Cyprus Experiment?

  • David

    If His Grace would kindly permit me to change the topic slightly.
    Like many on this site I am thoroughly tired of the BBC posing as an impartial public broadcaster, whilst pumping out its seriously left wing and misleading propaganda, all whilst living high on the fat of the land using what is, in effect, a government tax. I feel I should do my democratic duty and apply pressure by ceasing paying its wretched annual licence fee. Now it would not worry me if I never watched TV ever again. However my wife does enjoy some of the more sensible and tasteful programs. So what experience do any of you have of Netflix, including pros, cons and what have you ?

    • Brian

      My daughter and her husband don’t have a TV but they watch Netflix for £8 per month and it looks like better value.

      • David

        Thanks Brian.

    • grutchyngfysch

      Haven’t had a tv in decades. Did without to begin with but Netflix and prime (which pays for itself in delivery charges if you use Amazon 10 plus times a year) cover most of the bases. BBC programmes have tended to come out on one or the other about 6 months later so it’s really a delay more than anything. And if you really must, More4 and ITV catch up don’t require a licence.

      Biggest difference is that I realise that I consume virtually no adverts and read rather than watch the news. Seems to have a surprisingly significant effect on how one views the world.

      • David

        Thanks.
        I’ve discovered that a licence is only required for watching ‘live’ TV, or BBC iplayer
        Outside that if there’s a delay no licence is needed. Moreover the equipment used for watching is irrelevant. People started using PC, iPads and phones etc but one can use a TV, as long as its not live.

        • grutchyngfysch

          Yep. TV Licensing will permanently send you warnings even if you explain that you don’t watch live TV and offer to let them send someone round to confirm. I’ve been “subject to investigation” for the last 4 years to the point where I just chuck the letters in the bin now. Nobody has ever come round: which is a pity because if they did I’d be glad to show them the complete absence of a TV in the house.

          • David

            So expect bullying letters but don’t put the kettle on. I can live with that.

          • Maalaistollo

            I’ve been receiving their threatening letters since 1983. I generally send them back. I once had a visit (in the mid 1990s I think) from a weasely-looking operative whom I did not allow to cross my threshold. He kept trying to look past me for non-existent TVs. More recently I had a letter threatening that they would apply for a search warrant, but nothing came of that.

          • donadrian

            I get a letter once every two or three years asking me if my circumstances have changed, which I answer online to the effect that I still do not watch TV programmes in any of the ways that would require a licence (or, for that matter, at all). All perfectly amicable.

          • Maalaistollo

            Ah, but being a curmudgeon, I refuse to answer at all, because I believe I am entitled to the presumption of innocence and I object to repeated letters telling me that I am on their list of offenders.

        • dannybhoy

          I don’t understand netflix or any of these plugin things, but we did once (2003) give up tv for a year in protest at some twazzock saying there were too many programmes for white middle class middle aged viewers.
          It meant we had to go out to pubs to watch the Rugby World Cup and had someone tape* the final where dear Jonny Wilkinson scored that drop goal.
          Of course we achieved nothing and went back to paying the license..
          *Still got that tape!

        • John

          It’s changed. You need a license for catch-up now as well as live.

  • Chefofsinners

    Toby Young, welcome back to the world outside Theresa’s big tent. Fill your lungs with the sharp air of freedom, plant your feet sturdily, drop your trousers and resume pissing in. It is your gift, your calling and your duty.

  • Chefofsinners

    What would be the point in selecting children on the basis of intelligence, when cabinet ministers are being selected on the basis of ethnicity?
    White working class boys are the lowest achieving ethnic group in our country but it is apparently still desirable to discriminate against white males.

    • Royinsouthwest

      The left think they make up for discriminating against white working class boys by patronising them and telling them that they will defend them against the heartless Tories.

    • Ray Spring

      Of course white working class boys MUST be discriminated against.
      1/. They are Male.
      2/. They are White.
      How can we have an equal society without making equality selective?

  • Mike Stallard

    Shortly after he was expelled from our school, I read what Lamin Jawara had written on his desk:
    “Success at school is not success at life.”

  • Chefofsinners

    Commenters.

    • Sarky

      Pedant.

      • Chefofsinners

        A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver.

        • Sarky

          Typical proverbs…..makes no bloody sense.

          • Chefofsinners

            Yeah. Poncy wisdom literature.

  • not a machine

    Your grace posts an interesting topic and question which I have some agreement with but I have a different angle/question. Toby Young perhaps falls foul of the educational establishment and some provoking tweets, which happens in all sorts of situations and it may well be his robust outlook would not turn out students with some abilities that the education establishment have convinced are lesser in value. That aside in your post is a question I have had for some time,that being one of compulsion and it’s meanings in understanding or even receiving the holy spirit. It perhaps would be a long post to convey a complete construct and better minds than mine, have been on the same harsh battleground. I perhaps start with thought about cults, why is it we can be decieved even though we are God’s creation, why does evil seem to persist?. This is hard thing to understand or even hold faith in Christ about, how can it be some lives become abandoned of Christ or denied it?.This problem or question has been going on for some time and has various manefestions, the current version one around the potentials given by genetic knowledge and what is sometimes referred to as a road to realising mankinds full potential and evolve into high and increasingly more intelligent beings seeing God on equal terms, as we see and observe the universe. It was around a milennia ago when the platonic solar system was being challenged as we understood the earth revolves around the sun, which some old Egyptian texts had suggested. At the time the church like the Greek scholars believed that the sun revolved around the earth and other disagreements came about between enlightened thinkers and dogged theocratic ones. The basic thing though is the belief, which ends up being a bet, is that perfect knowledge will take mankind to its true beauty and potential. You catch the sub memes occasionally “did you know you only use 30% of your brain or mind?” meaning you are not at your potential or need to buy something to shift those dismal figures. I like some portrayals in film, but carousel in logans run offers an interesting image, when your embedded crystal lights you present yourself for your glorious public death, the basis has something of this perfect society only without space travel, things are decided for you in this perfect society, even when you should die, when you have lived to human genetic perfection in liberal pleasure and knowledge, no argument is offered as a Christian faith is removed and replaced with a return question or loop, some hidden intelligence having perfect knowledge without being human itself.
    Eminent Biologist and snail expert Steve Jones has speculated that at a certain level of intelligence, we effectively break free from natural selection, because we can control or change our environment. (more when I get my thoughts better)

  • Manfarang

    Young is lacking in intelligence, nothing more than a degenerate cokehead.

    • Chefofsinners

      We seem to have a climate where a comment about women’s anatomy is worse than any of that.

    • Jilly

      Totally wrong on both counts.
      Some off-colour tweets years ago and a very colourful youth.
      Check out his Free Schools drive since 2011 and family life.

      Who would be a prodigal son in these days of the Twitter Inquisition….

      • Manfarang

        Any other prodigal son would have done jail time for breaking the law.

        • Jilly

          ??

        • DespiteBrexit

          What law?

          • Manfarang

            Possession of a Class A drug.

  • I never read the piece that was found so awful. It is so awful that I thought it could be satire like Sydney Smith’s solution to overpopulation in Ireland. But a hanging offence?

  • michaelkx

    did not an A. Hitler think like him?

    • Royinsouthwest

      No more than H.G. Wells and other left wing intellectuals.

      • Dolphinfish

        There was actually a connection. The likes of Wells and (incredibly) DH Lawrence made eugenics respectable. Uncle Adolf would never have got off the ground if these Herberts and their likes had not prepared it for him.

        • Murti Bing

          The playwright G. B. Shaw clashed repeatedly with G. K. Chesterton on this very issue. Shaw was avidly in favour of something called ‘humane extermination units’. Chesterton, to his credit, vehemently opposed.

          • Anton

            Yes, all good men and true should support Chesterton in his clashes with the over-rated Shaw. They remained personal friends throughout their sparring, interestingly.

          • Murti Bing

            Who could fail to be good friends with a man such as Chesterton? His amiable self shines out from everything he has written. Shaw I am not so sure of (excuse the wording). Apparently he was also on very good terms with Conrad and Galsworthy. And Belloc, of course.

          • IanCad

            “humane extermination units”
            Much the best solution for those pesky “deplorables”

    • IanCad

      No Michael, Hitler was a man of the left; efficiency, expedience, extermination. The fastest route to a perfect world.

    • David

      Hitler led a party titled “The National Socialist Party”. He was a man of the left believing that the individual is born to serve the state.

    • SimonToo

      If you read the article itself, you should find that Mr. Young’s reasoning and aims differ significantly from those of Herr Hitler’s.

      Mr. Young produces a reasoned argument. One might disagree with it, and write a reasoned counter-argument. But if we read it in the context of what is currently socially acceptable, his argument is not obviously abominable, particularly given the present state of reproductive science and society’s embrace of it.

    • Ray Spring

      Not just Hit Man, most of the Western World had almost the same ideas. Hit Man just put them into effect. Or at least his underlings did. Which raises the problem, how did Hit Man achieve so much ‘change’, all on his own? Hitler made me do it is about as good a reason as the Devil made me do it for monstrous actions.
      What happened to all the people who were ‘only following orders?

      My Uncle Frank, WW1, had a Military Medal. Ended the war as a Private. He asked his officer, what shall I do with these German prisoners, Sir? Shoot them, was the order. No Sir, Geneva Convention forbids it, replied my Uncle.
      No Promotion.
      The catch was, you got promoted to become an Officer, and then led your men ‘over the top’. As a Private he could follow the herd. And survive.

    • michaelkx

      good points like to day? …….I think I would agree.

  • not a machine

    Smart meters do not save co2 spurious argument

  • Anton

    Donald Trump has grumbled about the US taking so many immigrants from “shithole countries” and asked why they can’t come from places like Norway.

    Can we have him please?

    • gadjodilo

      Refugees, of a sort, actually do come from Norway. The country’s leftist child ‘welfare’ system has a history of kidnapping children from their loving families and putting them into foster care, often for the most spurious of reasons. Some of these families are now living in Poland, Romania and other places where the sanctity of the family is more respected.

  • Murti Bing

    An interesting article to be read by all those who take a firm line on Toby Young’s character:

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/01/toby-young-once-more-unto-the-breach/

    • gadjodilo

      Looking at the vilification of Toby Young in this case one is reminded of what a deeply silly woman Polly Toynbee is, with her background reeking of privilege and her children in expensive private schools. “[T]he far right’s search for reasons why the poor are inferior has a long history”. The *far* right is generally drawn from the poor. And then there’s her contempt for religion, when in fact back in the day it was only the churches who were bothering to give education to poor people. Too many more reasons to list…….

  • gadjodilo

    Looking up the vilification of Toby Young in this case one is reminded of what a deeply silly woman Polly Toynbee is, with her background reeking of privilege and her children in expensive private schools. “[T]he far right’s search for reasons why the poor are inferior has a long history”. The *far* right is generally drawn from the poor. And then there’s her contempt for religion, when in fact back in the day it was only the churches who were bothering to give education to poor people. Too many more reasons to list….

  • Chefofsinners

    Ah the joy of mistakes made in our youth! Oh Toby Young again…

  • Louis E.

    The knee-jerk anti-eugenic prejudice of those who see genetic counselling as the start of a slippery slope to death camps must be fought at every level.