PK writes “Without its history of immigration, where would Australia be?”

Well, for starters the lives of the Aboriginal inhabitants would have been different. Would PK equate their rights to decide who comes here then to our rights to decide who comes here today?

spendocrat refers to the greed and selfishness of those questioning Australia's immigration policy. My concern is the greed and selfishness of those profiting hugely from high immigration, wholly at the expense of all Australians and the environment. Would such a person be altruistic because they support high immigration?

Both spendocrat and PK seem to acknowledge that stabilising Australia's population by reducing immigration would lead to improved living standards. But they see such an act as amoral, as they see reducing immigration as turning away from the world's poverty problem. So how does immigration as a means of reducing world poverty compare in efficacy with birth control programs and other forms of foreign aid? Promoting high immigration can only reduce Australia's per capita capacity to help the rest of the world in other ways if living standards are reduced as a consequence.

spendocrat's “one world” concept is something I would like to see developed. Would spendocrat like this collectivising concept to go as far as sharing an individual's wealth, or only as far as abolishing the world's borders?

Controlling immigration to Australia did have a partial basis in egalitarianism. There were many examples of unscrupulous employers seeking to undercut wages with cheap foreign labour prior to the passing of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1901. And there is substantial anecdotal evidence that the same thing is happening with 457 Visa guest workers today. I would suggest that without borders, Australia would quickly become the feudal society that many feared over a century ago.

On the subject of immigration, there is another question that I would love the bleeding hearts to address for me:

If it was wrong for the First Fleeters to come here, why is it right for anyone else to come here now?

The rate of immigration throughout our history has been adjusted to the needs of the country at any one time. For many years few would come unless subsidised, and all we had to do was turn the subsidy on and off.

At the start of the Depression the Governor-General issued a proclamation declaring that immigration would be stopped until further notice because of the unemployment. Why not do it again?

There is a simple way to reduce immigration and simultaneously improve average education - bring back the Dictation Test.

After all, one guy passed it in 1909.

It seems to me that the internationalists on this forum have no understanding at all of territoriality, which is an instinct that is so old that we share it with many animals.

Is it possible for us to entirely plan our urban environments for the good of humanity, or to just extend our egos and power dogmas? Are minds inscribed in a diseased spiral caused by the urban landscapes themselves. Is the agenda in planning for humans to prosper, have fun, be under surveillance, or to simply survive?

If you look at the Marshall Mc Luhan theory, the insanity of our road traffic congestion and unsustainable mess is just the insanity of modernity, and worse, a televisual culture. An insane society that confuses the ephemeral media with reality can hardly solve the real world. Greed, ego and denial are beyond responsibility and humanity has an insatiable weakness.

Economy over aesthetics results in ugliness and therefore sadness.

Ego over family and humanity in such chaos results in emptiness, loneliness, even suicide or violence.

Ever seen Marshall Mc Luhan theory speak? He's on U Tube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7GvQdDQv8g&NR

I cannot help but think of Jane Jacobs with "Dark Times Ahead".

http://www.americancity.org/article.php?id_article=126

What is the meaning of the term "Dark City"?

Is it this? :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6ngAlzE3FY

Charlton Heston in Soylent Green? :-

Bladerunner with Harrison Ford? :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mID7iCAjnU&NR

Not to mention the film "Dark City", "Matrix", and Batman's "Gotham City" which are easy to find on U Tube or Google.

The themes film and art show converge into similar themes. Not just futuristic urban nightmares where the environment collapses causing chaos.

They also include the inescapable link between urban environment being a reflection of the mind. The riddle to the way we think is found in our street-scapes. The way we think is also affected by the environment as well.

In a culture where fear and lies create power, you will find houses without faces, streets that are inhuman, and humans that do not recognise each other as humans. Roads and traffic funneling into unfair tollways. The poor: pushed away to ghastly isolated areas so similar to Soweto dust-pans: they can't afford the rent.

"Dark times ahead". Jane Jacobs

Oops

I missed a reference

Soylent Green can be found on : -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c25tTzGJmcs

For those curious to have a quick look.

Great retro sci fi stuff, scary as a possible future too.

: ) OLO's saintfletcher

spendocrat&pk, I would hope, that if your ideology comes to fruit, you have tribes of headhunters and cannibals settle near you plus a few tribes who do not practice birth control plus lots of mosques and quite a few interesting other cultural sorts.
You must find our quiet little country too, too boring. Have fun with your nice multiculture.

IT'S LIFE, BUT CERTAINLY NOT AS WE WANT IT
Dr Clive Hamilton, executive director of the Australia Institute.
30/12/06

"Plans revealed this week to squeeze a further 1.1 million people into Sydney over the next 25 years will transform it into the nation's least liveable city ...

Sydney must stop growing sooner or later. If the "endless growth" mentality is not reversed, in 20 years' time we will be reading in the Herald of the next plan to lever an extra million or so residents into a bursting metropolis.

The fact is that while the State Government can take measures to alleviate the pressures, in the end Sydney's expansion is decided in Canberra because overseas migration drives population growth.

Rarely in our history has a federal government pursued such a high level of immigration as the Howard Government. Each year about 130,000 new migrants arrive on our shores and a third of them decide to settle in Sydney. The Government plans to increase the numbers ...

The fact that John Howard, who has gained re-election by exploiting Hansonite xenophobia, has presided over a record inflow of foreigners is an irony little remarked, not least because the Government tries to keep the figures quiet.

The immigration program is a response to pressure from big business, which demands a steady flow of labour and dreams of a market of 50 million people.

The belief that Australia can accommodate a much bigger population is based on ignorance. Ecologically, Australia is not a wide brown land but a narrow green strip down the east coast. People don't want to live in Wilcannia and, as the national water crisis should tell us, there are not resources to support them ...

The business lobby and the Government will not admit it, but a high level of immigration is of no economic benefit. Gross domestic product grows but the higher income is merely spread over more people ...

Unlike natural population growth, the immigration tap can be eased back tomorrow. Doing so is the only way to protect the quality of life in Sydney ..."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/its-life-but-certainly-not-as-we-want-it/2006/12/29/1166895477172.html?page=2