Beautifully put - but the horror of it is that there seems to be a vicious cycle - create a rotten environment - loose social norms in individuals - which makes the environment worse still - and so on. I think we see this in Gaza - we (Israelis) have created environments in the occupied territories that breed people who we can justly call criminal (even after we've left Gaza).
I wish, I wish, I wish your article would appear in Hebrew in an Israeli newspaper as a comment on how our settlement policy creates an environment that makes criminals of Palestinians.

Jonathan , Haifa, Israel

Whilst there will always be some level of crime, the root cause of most of it is family breakdown. I don't see why a conservative would be uncomfortable making that point.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

As Dr. Deming said: "environment drives behaviour"

There is plenty of conclusive proof that this is so; so why has it been a political debating point for so long?

Mark Baker, Grays, UK

Spot on and fascinating, Danny. I really enjoyed this. We really need to recognise that a balance of both is needed, whilst the left too often ignores the need for people to take responsibility (and introduces wrong-headed ways of trying to help people's situations).

Edward, London, UK

Isn't it a shame Mr. Letwin couldn't say that in the first place?
A very lucid and easy to follow explanation of *hug a hoodie*.

Joshua, Oxford, UK

Daniel. Letwin's comments were a JOKE to demonstrate Labour's reliance on nonsense management speak. Do your research properly.

Gareth, london,

As I recall, one particularly charming item on the original Situationist menu involved a walk through Town A while consulting a map of Town B to see where it led - the journey rather than the destination taking seniority. So-called new political paradigms meanwhile, are of course rarely ever that - merely adaptations or variations on a broader theme with recourse to newly-adopted roadmaps. The Situationists did this in groups of 3 or 4 friends. On the march to the ballot box however, politicians of all flavors in pied-piper aspect attempt to take the entire population along with them for the duration of at least one parliament. The last dramatic 'paradigm shift', as you've briefly touched on, burped up neo-con pronouncements like "no society", "criminals make crime" and "busses are for losers".
Memories of Ronnie and Maggie sharing a joke at Camp David - ahh, how the stomach churns. Paradigmatically of course.

Mark Szawlowski, Istanbul, Turkey

Re:Kong Kek Kuat, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

As you live overseas, how the hell would you know?

phil, worcester, uk

Kong Kek Kuat - try living in the UK where doctors and nurses are being made redundant, our pensions are worth a fraction of what they were when Tony Blair came to power, we can now be arrested and imprisoned without trial, half of our children are leaving school unable to read and write properly, and our Armed Forces are fighting and dying in a distant land as a result of Government lies. Your opinions of Tony Blair may be a little different!

James Miller, London, UK

Of course both disposition and situation play a role. (Just like genes and raising). I know several people who behaved rightly under 'situationally challenging' conditions.
Also in Nazi times there were such (exceptional) people.

Bill, Bristol, UK

'Adaptability' is a defining characteristic of us humans. The better we adapt, the more likely we are to survive. We are subconsciously programmed to do it. For most people, most of the time, we adjust our behaviour to the environment that surrounds us. So society does need to manage this environment. Perhaps the Disney Corp might have some useful words of advice, in this regard, for Dave and the gang as they strive to plot a better future for our befuddled land.

Charles, London, England

Yea. Change they may have, the Tories -- it is a matter of survival to be relevant. But I still can´t see any change of substance; I still don´t see any Tony Blair replacement. There is nothing of quality from the Tories' current presentation. Nobody said it better than Mrs. Thatcher: The Tories don´t need someone who can defeat Tony Blair, they need someone like him. I think this statement is still highly applicable. Actually, I would like to add: Britain doesn´t need someone who can do a better job than Tony Blair (good luck with that), she needs someone who can continue with the job he´s doing. And I don´t see anyone capable of that.

Kong Kek Kuat, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

There are aspects of truth in both the dispositionalist and situationalist analyses. However, it isn't an either/or matter. Individuals ARE responsible for their actions and their life situation does have an impact. The critical factor is the moral code in which the individual is educated and accepts. Moral individuals can and have said no to evil regardless of the situation in which they find themselves; for example, Germans who protected Jews during the Nazi era. Other examples are people born in terrible proverty in slums who go on to be hard working, successful, honourable people. Individuals without a decent moral code born in the most posh circumstances have turned evil.

The Conservative emphasis on "stable families" is inadequate. A stable family without traditional morals - whose belief is that dishonesty and abuse against others is OK - is the real basis of "social breakdown".

The present Conservative leadership are naive and foolish - too inexperienced.

S Mann, Tunbridge Wells,

Hmm. I note you don'\t quote the example of the Germans turning on the Jews in Germany - much safer to stick to the Hutus when choosing to absolve people of responsibility for their own behaviour. Incidentally, councils used quite often to place 'problem' families on 'good' council estates in the seventies and eighties, in a reverse of earlier policy. The result was that decent estates went rapidly downhill. The many millions spent on the North Peckham Estate, to no effect whatsoever, show the perils of assuming that a better envirnoment will lead to better behaviour.
Perhaps the Palo Alto residents didn't vandalise the car because they had too much to lose if they were caught? Harsh penalties work when it comes to changing behaviour over drink driving or speeding. Why should it be any different for other crimes? Give us some examples of where a situationalist approach has lowered vandalism and crime rates.

kate, oxford,

This article actually made me laugh out loud. How dare the Right try and claim as a new 'paradigm' a position that the LEFT have been espousing for decades - that criminal behaviour is more to do with socialisation than 'evil' genes. I suppose it just illustrates the old adage; that on social issues, today's left-wing position is tomorrow's scientifically 'proven' orthodoxy.

Jason, London,

You have wilfully ignored the elephant in your own particular sitting room, even though it is obvious enough in the examples you cite: - that of race.

While everyone is capabable of doing nasty things given the environment, are some people perhaps a bit more capable than others?

What does our experience tell us? Or our common sense?

Bob Grant, Leicester,