Monday, September 28, 2009

The Fight For Australian Culture

Our national and cultural identity has developed through the years: From colonial beginnings (1788 to early 1800s), to the currency lads and lasses (1800s), to the wild gold rush days (1850s), to the nationalist blossoming (1880s to 1890s), to Federation (1901), to World War One (1914-1918), to the Depression (1930s), to World War Two (1939-1945) with its threat of invasion (1941-1942), to the prosperous Menzies era (1950s-1960s), and even to the internationalist era of today (1970s to the present).

This identity arose from among those Australians (especially the native-born) who saw this country as their home, loved it as their own, and drew their inspiration from it.

In many ways, the Australian identity grew in spite of, not because of, the various foreign cultures that threatened to swallow, or at least graft themselves onto, our native identity. We suffered the ever-present "British mind-set" (especially prevalent 1788 to 1950s, but still existing today) which thought of Britain as "home" or "the mother country", and which viewed anything British as being vastly superior to anything that was Australian or "colonial" (the "cultural cringe"); and which taught and promoted the concept that Australian culture was "British", thus stifling the development of our own national culture. That same sort of cultural threat continues today with the "multiculturalist mind-set" (1970s to the present) which, while sometimes paying lip-service to the ideal of Australian culture, believes that it needs to be "changed" or "enriched" (actually meaning "diluted", or "contaminated") by every possible culture from around the globe, and is doing so to such an extent that our Australian national culture and identity is actually being slowly but steadily destroyed; and which views almost anything foreign as being somehow superior to the way of the Australians (this prejudice may sometimes be hidden, but look closely - it is there: the new "cultural cringe").


Wednesday, September 23, 2009

The Trash of Islam

The Egyptian city of Cairo, the largest city in the Arab world and the "timeless city" of Obama's Cairo speech, is suffering from a garbage crisis. The crisis has a very simple cause, the pigs that used to eat the garbage were killed to prevent the spread of Swine Flu. The pigs living in "Garbage City" had served as both organic garbage disposals and food sources for the Zabaleen, families of marginalized Christian Copts who made a living by collecting the garbage, reselling the inorganic garbage and feeding the organic garbage to pigs. The system worked fine so long as there were pigs, but without the pigs, Cairo's streets are filled with giant mounds of rotting garbage.


Population boom our biggest since 60s

  • There's now 21.8 million Australians
  • Most growth due to immigration
  • 160,000 babies born in the year to March

AUSTRALIA'S population soared by almost half a million people in the year to March - a boom not seen since the 1960s.

A green group says that's no cause for celebration and has called for immigration to be cut to protect the environment.

Australian Bureau of Statistics data released today shows the population increased by just over two per cent - or 439,000 people - in the year to March.


The sorts of growth we see in this article are quite frankly, ridiculous. I'll bet my bottom dollar that the real growth is more likely in the millions, if we factor in the students, temporary residents, asylum seekers and all the other sorts of back-door immigration programs. Shit, you don't need the statistics to tell you what is so bloody obvious, you only have to take a trip down to your local supermarket or a ride on public transport, to see that the growth in immigration is outrageously enormous. This government is in the process of not only allowing, but also actively encouraging, a foreign invasion of our sovereign nation. As far as I'm concerned, that is treason. - Dave

Apologists for evil

Saturday, September 19, 2009

More People + Fewer Resources = Growing Conflict

This article illustrates some of the problems that the current population increase advocates are heading us towards. As the population increases, the demand for resources also increases. With a rapidly dwindling supply of such necessities as water and arable land for example, and the increasingly likelihood of consequent pollution of that water and arable land, the current population increase agenda is steering us head long into an unsustainable future of not only resource depletion but also full scale conflict.

The agenda of this government, and pretty much all current governments, are woefully inadequate to meet the needs of a resource deficient future. A sustainable society is a society which appreciates the balance between what is environmentally feasible and what is economically desirable. This government understands neither. - Dave

History books are filled with wars being fought over resources. It's not a new phenomenon, but it's a growing one. As supplies shrink of the resources we depend on most, conflicts will continue to intensify, and spread, around the world. Climate change is expected to exacerbate conflicts in already hard-hit places, like Africa. This is bad news, considering some of the world's most intense conflicts, including Darfur, are already linked with competition for water and other resources.

It's simple math: more people relying on quickly diminishing resources is a recipe for disaster. No one knows what that will look like exactly, except that it will not be peaceful. And it's not just a concern for overseas. Security experts predict that resource wars will start to be fought in more industrialized and relatively stable countries as communities struggle for access to resources they need to survive. Until patterns of consumption are changed, prospects for the future health of the planet and human population remain bleak. Access to crucial resources like food and water are not yet human rights, and the more people turn to fighting for them, the farther from it they will become.


Immigration not the only way to counter our ageing population

Here's another article from 'the Australian', discussing pretty much the same thing as the previous article from the Australian below, except this time they mention some of the ramifications of a massive immigration agenda on Australia, which to them means mainly job competition for youngsters competing with immigrants and over 55's staying on in jobs. I think much more importantly though, the immigration agenda pays little to no attention to the glaringly obvious fact, that Australia is already well beyond its human carrying capacity. Increasing the population in Australia is foolhardy folly at best and completely irresponsible idiocy at worst. I'm going with the second assumption. - Dave

THE Rudd government should be wary about using high levels of immigration in coming decades as a means to counteract the decline in productivity resulting from an ageing population because more over-55s are staying on in their jobs, a population expert warns.

Monash University demographer Bob Birrell said Treasury's new population estimate for Australia -- 35 million by 2050 -- was based on immigration levels of about 180,000 a year, a rate that may not be necessary to keep the economy running and will be difficult to provide for in terms of urban infrastructure and services.

"The government seems to have bought the argument that business in Australia needs a high amount of labour force growth to keep it going in the future. The rest of us are going to have to bear the consequences of that," Professor Birrell said yesterday.


Friday, September 18, 2009

Australian population to hit 35 million in 2049

And here is an article which discussed the dangerously and recklessly absurd agenda to increase Australia's population to 35 million.

It ought to be quite obvious to anyone, except maybe politicians and economists, that population increase translates into living standard decrease, and besides that, Australia already has environmental fatigue, destruction and resource depletion well beyond its human carrying capacity. - Dave

THE Australian population will explode to 35 million people in a generation, and we will be younger than previously thought.

Our demographic surge will be driven by more women of childbearing age, higher fertility rates, and increased net overseas migration.

Treasurer Wayne Swan will today provide a glimpse into the future when he reveals key details from the much-anticipated third Intergenerational Report, The Courier-Mail reports.

The full report, due to be released before next year's federal Budget, is a crucial planning tool.

With Treasury Secretary Ken Henry's review of the nation's taxation system, the intergenerational data will guide the Rudd Government's policies for the nation's growing and ageing population.

Mr Swan will tell the launch of the Australian Institute For Population Ageing Research in Sydney that the proportion of people over 65 will almost double to 25 per cent of all Australians in 2049.


Ageing means 'serious migration competition'

I've been away for a while, so here's some propaganda for you to digest. The immigration agenda is still in full swing, working tirelessly to destroy our country for the ruin of future generations of Australians. The aging population rubbish is getting a bit old, but they know that most Australians too lazy to educate themselves properly and too stupid to realise. - Dave

Article from: The Australian

AUSTRALIA could have a fight on its hands in coming decades to attract the migrants needed to ensure a labour force large enough to offset productivity losses caused by a rapidly ageing population.

John Piggott, the director of the newly created Australian Institute for Population Ageing Research at the University of NSW, said the problems associated with an ageing society were not confined to Australia, meaning skilled workers would become coveted around the world.

"In 40 years the world will be very different," he said. "At the moment there are 400 million people aged 60-plus across Asia. By 2050, it will be 1.25 billion. It's important to realise it's not just an Australian issue.

"It will become more difficult than some might imagine to maintain migration levels, because everybody will be wanting them. There will be serious migration competition."

As Australia looks ahead to determine the right mix of migration and natural population growth to meet the economic challenges of its ageing population, Professor Piggott said developing policies to promote greater workforce attachment for workers older than 55 was another productivity opportunity.

"We could be looking at ways to change workplace practice to make it more appealing to older people," he said. "For instance, allowing them scope to care for their elderly parents, or look after their grandkids. We're better at this than we used to be but we've got some way to go."

Developing sophisticated population policy, one of the roles of Professor Piggott's new institute, is critical to the nation's forward planning given the proportion of Australians older than 65 will almost double to a quarter of the total population by 2050.

At present, five Australians of working age support every person older than 65; by 2050, the proportion is forecast to be 2.4 people of working age.

Such statistics prompted the Howard government to offer a universal baby bonus in 2004 in a bid to increase the nation's fertility rate, and the rate of our migration intake has become a thorny political issue.

Melbourne mother of three Donna D'Allessandro said she joked with her husband on becoming pregnant with Matthew, her youngest, about their contribution to the nation. "We did say one for Scott, one for Donna and one for the country," Ms D'Allessandro said, a reference to former treasurer Peter Costello's call to Australian parents to boost the population. "But really, we always planned to have three and government policy didn't have much to do with it."

Ms D'Allessandro said she wasn't too concerned about the size of Australia's population in 40 years' time, provided there was sufficient infrastructure to deal with the increased numbers.


Of course, what Ms D' doesn't seem able to comprehend, much like most Australians, is that living standards will plummet either way, and her children will be growing up in a country full of non-Australians, and besides that, we already have environmental degradation and resource depletion well beyond Australian's human carrying capacity. A population beyond 20 million is quite simply, recklessly absurd. An aging population means a sustainable population decrease, exactly what we need and ought to be planning for. - Dave