The Cat Peeps out of the Bag: The Immigration Conspiracy By James Reed

     Many have been saying that there is a conspiracy to Asianise Australia through mass immigration, the notable actionist being Denis McCormack, who has published a grand paper on this, appropriately called, “The Grand Plan,” if my memory serves me well.

     Now we have, behind a paywall, so the internet reference is not of much use, Judith Sloan, “A Conspiracy Exists to Allow High Immigration Rates,” The Weekend Australian, February 24-25, 2018, p. 22. Sloan is one of the few journalists offering criticisms of Australia’s record high immigration rate, and this time she does a great job saying that there is a “conspiracy” among the political class and new class, Canberra bureaucrats, to overstate the benefits of immigration, and downplay the costs.

     The economic benefits of immigration are, even according to orthodoxy, small. GDP is often trumped as increasing, while the real measure should be per capita gross GDP. The figures look better that way, and gives the Canberra cane toads (my metaphor) the illusion of real growth. Immigration has only a small impact on the ageing of the population, and the government’s own Productivity Commission has said so, but that is ignored by the mania of growth.

     The most important point is that the economic studies of the alleged benefits of immigration do not take into account the costs of immigration, such as increased environmental destruction, the loss of urban amenity, congestion, and so on. These same old arguments can be seen in Adam Creighton’s “Plenty of Room for the Country to Grow,” The Weekend Australian, February 24-25, 2018, p. 16. Why, much of the country is uninhabited (yes, it’s desert). Apparently, there are no environmental concerns at all, which is news to most Australian scientists: the human ecological footprint on Australia is high, not tiny, having the 13th largest impact in the world:

     If the rest of the world lived like Australians, 3.6 Earths would be needed, which goes to show that not all the world can live this way, and immigration will only increase environmental degradation. But, best of all is the old classic from Arthur Calwell, that US power is waning so we need a bigger population, or “perish.” No thought here about the irrelevance of population levels in a high tech world (have any economists heard of nuclear bombs?), or even that the large population may have an ethno-racial composition which undermines any security effort, so that immigration becomes just a form of self-defeating colonisation. The arguments are smoke.

     A better take can be found by Terry McCrann, “Better is Certainly Not Better For Australia,” The Weekend Australian, February 24-25, 2018, p. 38, who puts the case that our population is growing too fast. It is clear that action is needed and ideally there should be the high energy protests that the Left deliver, but conservatives don’t have the strength, anger, or desire to survive, for that. Nevertheless in the safety of a voting cubicle, with no one watching, one can till safely write: “Reduce Immigration”: 



No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Friday, 12 July 2024

Captcha Image