Only a fool highlights typos SPQR, are you, Spells Perfect Queen Ratbag, SPQR? The likes of you would exploit anyone and everyone for your own profit. As for exploration I doubt you get out of your tree to explore anything.

Sorry SPQR, please don't correct me, I know, Queen should have been Queer. Sorry.

Paul 1405,
You're jumping way ahead of the discussion and you're applying your usual Anti White spin to the matter, the thread title is Small Nations Forum.
I'm talking about nations and a new South Pacific civilistaion, not states with borders and rules regulating who can and cannot be part of this or that nation.
There's no reason several nations couldn't exist on this continent, the optimum size for a productive, stable nation is judged at 4-7 million, given that about 7% of the population relocate each year the "breakup" of the federation could be done peacefully. You could live in a liberal multiracial society, some might prefer a theocracy, others a socialist republic and so on and people would naturally gravitate to the nation which suited their needs and best enhanced their future prospects. Those nations plus those of our near neighbours would make up the south Pacific Civilisation,each with it's own distinct character.
The alternative, if we keep to the current course is what's come to be known as "flatland" where the state by the use of coercive force raises up some nations and holds down others to reflect the same low "Multicultural" standard for the sake of appearances only.

I am constantly in awe of the folk on this forum who have mastered the art of meaningless generalization, and who deliver same with such nonchalant brio. So, hats off to Jay of Melbourne for this one:

>>...the optimum size for a productive, stable nation is judged at 4-7 million<<

Ok, I'll bite. Let's have a look at some of the countries that occupy this golden category of optimum-ness.

Wow.

Eritrea, 6.3 million
El Salvador, 6.3 million
Togo, 6.2 million
Sierra Leone, 6.2 million
Kyrgystan, 5.5 million
Turkmenistan, 5.2 million
Costa Rica, 4.7 million
Central African Republic, 4.6 million
Republic of the Congo, 4.4 million

Yeah, ok, I'm being selective. New Zealand has 4.5 million inhabitants, after all. Mind you, I'm not sure whether that proves your point or not...

But that's not the issue. I'm not necessarily arguing against the actual point being made...

>>There's no reason several nations couldn't exist on this continent<<

However, the central point is essentially trashed by the careless use of a meaningless "statistic" that is intended to provide justification for it.

It happens too often. We seem to have lost the capacity to enter into any discussion - politics, climate, religion, whatever - unless we have some off-the-wall statistic to offer. And more often that not, it seems, these are simply pulled out of the air.

Or somewhere a lot darker.

Pericles,
Norway,Sweden,Denmark,Uruguay,Finland,Latvia,Croatia...the list goes on but you're judging success and stability by different criteria than those used by Nationalists, the point is that we see things differently and have our own standards. From a Nationalist point of view there are already several proto-nations on the Australian continent anyway, once they reach several million in number you'll see the type of social stratification and population "clumping' that you see in North America and Europe. Example The inner urban White "trendies" as people insist on calling them here are a proto nation when compared to the rural or commuter belt Whites, different values, different culture, different political system,different social hierarchy. They could easily have their own nation centered in one of the Eastern cities, Queensland could gradually become a Christian theocracy with it's proximity to the Pacific Islands, NT could all end up as a semi agrarian mixed Asian/White/Indigenous nation if the planned shift in agricultural production is realised..rice paddies, resorts and water buffaloes, you get my drift.
I'm just throwing out ideas, I don't think too many people think they're crazy and the transition wouldn't be too traumatic for most people, it's not as if train loads of poor people would be shipped off to Siberia, Canberra,Darwin or Melbourne are tolerable place for anyone to live.

Pericles, Paul,
Apologies, you're probably dying to know where I think all of us Deep Green/Reactionary/Fascist types would go? Probably Tasmania or the South Island of New Zealand, we'd be one of the smallest nations, obviously.