A very logical article.
I can see why a pro-immigrant, anti-racism article like this one would stir up the pro-white, anti-everyone-else brigade!

JoM, I really can't see ANY 'community group' looking for a 'respectable' racist to give them a talk and that they can all look up to... Lol.
I guess maybe a community group looking to start an Australian chapter of the Aryan Nation maybe...?

Malcolm King “The anti-pops thinking has much in common with the conspiratorial and delusional beliefs of the Heaven’s Gate cult”

Such as?

In the breakdown of supposedly “Temp” visas, the departures are consistently *half* the arrivals.
Surely, if past arrivals are similar to today, there should be an approximately equal number.

If 200,000 “temps” arrive each year, but only 100,000 leave *each* year, there is a net gain *every* year of 100,000 supposedly "temporary" people!

The Australian citizens' arrivals and departures are virtually identical, so why do pro-pops always bring this up?

If anything, departures of our citizens are more noticeable, as the proportion of the total departures is almost *double* the proportion of arrivals.

“the numbers of foreigners allegedly invading our borders sinks to 84,014 souls and then drops further to 77,636 when we deduct those who leave.”

77,000 people who weren't here the year before.
Who need homes, jobs, food, energy....
And another 77,000 next year.
And another 77,000 the year after.

No problem! We still have some arable farmland and native forest on the East coast that hasn't been bulldozed yet.

And a few species that aren't endangered yet.

“Because the anti-pops are innumerate racists.”

Every people on Earth is “racist”.
There are even many peoples who are a mixture of multiple ancestries. And they all want *their* people to survive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiracial#Ethnic_groups

Just because we have a single racial (but multi-ethnic) ancestry, we are “racist”, only because that single race is “White/European/Caucasoid”.

We don't care about Kiwis and returning Aussies because, shock horror, they won't dramatically alter our demographics beyond recognition.

What you forget to mention in your breakdown is how many non-Europeans there are in the “perms”: 3 out of 4.

It's not just an invasion, it's an inversion (of our demographic history).

“We are all organisms, each with a unique character.”

And a *shared* character, biologically and culturally inherited from *our* ancestors.

Our close, direct, recent ancestors, not prehistoric Mitochondrial Eve.

“Lets give the anti-pops attitude a name – racist.”

Let's give the any-old-pops-will-do attitude a name – genocidal.

suseonline,
No, the premise of the article is that since there is in his opinion no scientific basis for the claims of the sustainability lobby they must therefore be "racist".
I've played this game with anti Racists over and over and I always win because they can never name even one publicly avowed "racist".
"Racism" is just a kill word used by bourgeois criminals to oppress those whom they deem inferior, to kill debate, to kill dissent, to kill democracy and kill working class people's political liberty.

With the escalating rise in immigration you must take into account the enormous amount of agricultural land being taken over for housing and also of course for infrastructure. Australia is not blessed with an infinite amount of good land and the water resource is problematical to say the least.
It also means more power generation with it's increased emissions, public transport is lagging behind demand and housing is woefully inadequate.
The only reason that vested interests have for increasing the population is to provide a larger pool of labour to force down wages and the spin off is in providing a bigger base of consumers to soak up the output of (mostly) imported retail goods.
There is no good reason to increase Australia's population other than greed.

I think you're right Jay.

The article has banged another nail in the hopes of the anti-populationists that their fear campaign has any solid empirical evidence. They didn't even know that about a quarter of NOM were Aussies and Kiwis. They don't know the export capacity of our food production nor do they know a key leading indicator of population, people per abode. What does that say about their research? They are laughable.

Even so, I think they will get votes from the far right who loath foreigners, Muslims and people who don't come from Anglo stock. They will also do well from NIMBYs and those who can't add up.

One of the reasons why the Greens, ALP and Libs won't have a bar of these silly social engineers is that, to coin a phrase, 'if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck', then its a duck. Ditto the 'foreigners out' stance of the SPA, SPGN and Stable Population Australia.

Apparently Malcolm King hasn't bothered to research the objects of his ad hominem and straw man attacks, the so-called "anti-pops", both the SPP and the SPA have explicitly non-racist manifestos. The claim that all opponents of high population growth are racially motivated is nonsense and prejudicial.

The drivel on the "Mayan Apocalypse" was amusing (and irritating) due to the author's total lack of understanding of what the Maya actually believed, he's fallen into the same trap again, with all the confidence of the ignorant.