Comments

Religions may be unethical but they aren't irrelevant because so many people are influenced by them. For this reason it seems important to give space to comments by sensible (and ethical) commentators within their forums on issues which are relevant to candobetter's objectives. You and I may have a natural tendency to ignore religions - I was never brought up in one - but the government, the media and many people do not. Sheila Newman, population sociologist home page Copyright to the author. Please contact sheila [AT] candobetter org or the editor if you wish to make substantial reproduction or republish.

We can now officially announce that the Stable Population Party has achieved the 500 members required for federal registration as a political party. On 31 May 2010 we lodged our application for registration with the Australian Electoral Commission. Thank you to everyone who supported the membership drive. It has been a big project with a range of invaluable contributions. Here is a link to the latest newsletter from the Stable Population Party with the announcement: http://www.populationparty.com/newsletter/newsletter_display.php?secID=108&id=164 It is my view that an election in August is quite possible - perhaps 50/50 - which would prevent us from standing candidates under the party name. We need to complete the (approximately 12 week) registration process before the election is called. That is out of our hands, so we will now progress with other aspects of the party's development and wait for news from the AEC and the Rudd Government. Kind regards William Bourke Stable Population Party of Australia www.populationparty.com

Thank you on behalf of James, Agent Provocateur. Actually, I wasn't going to broadcast his illness in case it comforted his enemies! He is making progress after a collision between his bicycle and a car thirteen days ago, but is still in a great deal of pain and cannot walk without assistance. It could be months before he is able to resume aspects of his normal life. We all feel very upset for him and all his supporters are invited to invoke whatever magic they may believe in to restore James back to health and to cheer the rest of us up, who miss him.

Here in Australia pensioners, students and the unemployed are being denied a liveable wage, and the funding to our public schools, hospitals, housing and higher education is continually being stretched, due to our heavy population growth rate. Both the Labor and Liberals are more interested in corporate wealth and profits than the needs of people, and with our manufacturing industries and many public assets sold off for globalisation, land speculation and property investment are the the biggest urban industries now - thus the need for a continual flow of buyers! In a report released in December last year, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) said 25 million to 1 billion people could be displaced by climate change by mid-century. Some asylum seekers no doubt are unsuitable to assimilate, but where is our nation's compassion and duty of care towards people, climate justice, and protection for the environment that all life depends on? We can't take all the world's refugees, but our capacity to accommodate refugees is being impeded by our own, manufactured, population growth rate.

As Jonathan has said: ...not all religions have this dogma and indeed to damn all of religion based upon the ills of one arm of Christianity is extremely ignorant and shows incredible bias towards mono and (poly) theistic belief systems. No free kicks, witch hunts or 'free for alls' - respectful, reasoned argument must always prevail if any kind of change for the better, is to be accomplished. We Can All Do Better than this'.

I've just had a quick look at the 'argument' which Jacko stated was 'Hysterical nonsense!' "Today's 21st century official slaughter of Australian native animals is no different to the official slaughter of Australian native people by European colonists, who treated Aboriginal people as vermin." Jacko said that his objection to the 'controlled (RSPCA) killings is that the meat was wasted.' ... 'Anyone who knows Australia knows that kangaroo species are far from extinction, reaching- artificial - plague proportions in many areas.' By the way, did the 'conscientious objectors know their facts? On Kangaroo farming... http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/kangaroos.html Kangaroo management and use Kangaroos have long been important to the survival of Australia’s Indigenous peoples, who have hunted kangaroos for tens of thousands of years for both the meat and the skins. ... and... The commercial harvesting of widespread and abundant kangaroo species contributes to the sustainability of the Australian environment. ...The kangaroo industry Australia’s kangaroo industry began exporting kangaroo meat to Europe in 1959 in response to interest from the European game meat industry. Today kangaroo meat and skins are exported all over the world. Even the Americans have modified their views... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/new-york-overturns-ban-on-sale-of... After a six month lobbying effort, New York lawmakers have agreed to drop a ban on the sale of all but one kangaroo species. Only the rare Tasmanian Forester Kangaroo will remain off the menu, the Herald Sun has learned. Australian officials recently rejected a push to place the giant marsupial on the national threatened species list. What's the problem? Did the writers of the 'Hysterical Nonsense' do any research?

"Anyone who knows Australia knows..." is meaningless. You would need to cite reliable statistics, but there appear to be none in Australia to support your assertion. Which makes it hysterical, to use your own inflammatory term. The article suggests that those who slaughtered Aboriginal people were placing them on the same level as other indigenous species and classifying all of them as vermin. Does the article defend or criticise that attitude?

Around 20 Japanese protesters staged a noisy rally and waved signs saying "Hang terrorist Peter Bethune!" and "Destroy Caucasian discrimination against Japanese!" outside the Tokyo District Court. If there is nothing else to accuse activists of these days, then they trump up the "racist" or "terrorist" labels so that these words have little genuine meaning any more. It is like those losing a debate taking the last resort of personally insulting the opposition! Having a high moral ground, as Sea Shepherd does, is an affront to these environmental criminals and their supporters. They have to resort to modern, meaningless, throw-away vocabulary, as their only defense!

The City of Nedlands has reversed its decision made back in December 2009 to protect bushland and vital black cockatoo habitat in Shenton Park. Private meetings between the University of Western Australia and the council have resulted in a sham voting process that allowed supporters of the development to speak yet gagged those that were opposed. Two years ago our current WA premier, Colin Barnett pleaded with the Labor government to buy the land from UWA so that the area could be preserved. Today he appears to have changed his mind and states that the issue has "moved on". I would suggest it is more likely he himself has moved on and refuses to include the aquisition of this land in his state budget.

Excellent article, Tim. I can thoroughly empathise with you! When my daughter in law told me at Christmas they were planning to start a family, I struggled to restrain the look of horror that was threatening to break out all over my face. She did notice my total lack of exhilaration and I managed to ask her calmly 'but what kind of world will you be bringing your kids into. I am very concerned for our future.' "It’s embarrassing for Australia that we eat our own wildlife ....I’m here to tell you it’s just not right. Simply do not buy, use or eat kangaroo products” ~ Steve Irwin Sign the most important petition ever created to help kangar

It's all pollution. 'Climate change', 'global warming', whatever the label, it is still just pollution - the problem that was apparent in 1975.

Where do the climate change deniers think smoke, fumes, exhaust goes?
Just because the next day has a blue sky morning doesn't mean the pollution has vanished. It has just been spread around the globe in the atmosphere.

It has been blowing around since the linen mills, then the coal fired power stations.

And since the Industrial Revolution, human population has grown with 'progress'.

Electric car technology is available and denying family benefits after two children per family would start to make a difference. The problem lies in greedy selfish people, greedy selfish corporations and a political lack of will. Look at the families complaining about expensive child care as if it were a right after people decided to have multiple children, or the power stations complaining about a emissions tax as if they had a right to pollute.

The politicians certainly do need to be strong will to stand up to greed.

Tiger Quoll
Snowy River 3885
Australia

Well said, John Marlowe! You are particularly spot-on about Darwin's theories. There is a great book: Thomas F. Glick, (Ed.), The Comparative Reception of Darwinism, University of Chicago Press, 1988 composed of articles on this subject. In fact the mere mention of Darwin inspired me to ferret out an old piece of writing and post it as "Darwinism, Secularism and Religious Education in Australia - 1860s to 21st c.

Wake Up! The Australian Labor Party recognises immigrant rights over locals. Recall colonialism did this to Aborigines. Neocolonialism is extending the philosophy to accommodate what Labor conceives as a new wave of workers to boost economic data, so locals can move aside.

Federal Labor's propaganda labels it 'securing our future', 'building a 21st century economy', 'delivering fairness', 'securing an inclusive future for all Australians', 'strengthening Australia in a changing world'.

Victorian Labor propaganda labels it 'A Fairer Victoria'...'helping those clichéd 'working families', 'growing the western suburbs'... by evangelistic 'urban renewal' and a shit load of houses.

As for Melbourne's eastern suburbs, Labor plans "to make sure Melbourne remains one of the most liveable cities in the world."

Get with it Liberal Camberwell. Camberwell's heritage pedestrian scale rail station needs to be bulldozed to make the precinct look like Southbank on a Hong Kong vision. This is where you get the 9-storey building, 3-storey building and a public plaza and 118 units.

Accommodating immigrant demand in then name of progress.
How dare locals criticise, else be dismissed as racist.
Camberwell's historic and cultural character of the area may be offensive to immigrants. By having such a strong local heritage may not newcomers feel welcome.

Opposing progress just stifles growth and the economy.

Camberwell' - Brumby's new centre for high rise for progressive new Australians and their multicultural richness!
Invite the change! Share the diversity!
You may have more congestion, less room, more shops whose signs are in foreign languages, but greater 'urban renewal' and greater choice of restaurant cuisine.
Enjoy!

I think you mean an 'Ecomalthusian', Tim.

Yesterday, the 19th May, was two years since over 500 kangaroos were brutally slaughtered at Belconnen, and then later another 4000 or so kangaroos were also "culled" at the Majura Army Base. Kevin Rudd or Environment Minister Peter Garrett declined to stop the killings. It was supported by the RSPCA's Micheal Linke. Strangely, kangaroos don't fit into any of "all creatures great and small" categories! As a result of the slaughter, many people now work together to campaign even more strongly for the kangaroos. The environmentalist who were so concerned about the endangered species that were being "threatened" by the kangaroos are now silent about the land where once these gentle native animals once roamed. The land cleaners are there now, and no voice for the legless lizards, endangered sunflowers and native grasses? Bulldozers have moved in and the area is being razed for houses, with scant concern for the small endangered animals that the kangaroos were supposed to be threatening. Having hypocrisy revealed is a great silencer! The real threat to native species are livestock grazing, infrastructure and population growth, but kangaroos don't have political or economic power! They are easy targets to "manage" and eradicate. There are shifts and changes in thinking towards our environment, including attitudes towards native animals, that are positive and constructive. However, our politicians are driven by economic growth, quantitative measures of "success" and our native animals don't "fit" into their agenda, their modus operandi, their paradigm. The easy way to solve perceived wildlife problems is with firearms, but the treatment of and concern for animals is increasingly becoming a social and legal issue, as well as a political force. We must not forget the shameful slaughter of Australian wildlife in such a large-scale and brutal manner, in Australia's heart-land "Bush Capital".

This is positive feedback on yes "a grave national problem" which is encouraging to have come from a new political party in Australia. Australia needs a paradigm shift away from irrelevant dominance of a post-war Lib Lab two party system. It has become self-serving.

Bourke would do well to research the economic theories on growth and the relationships to population growth, so that he can enunciate in economic terms the problems. For instance, what does Bourke mean by "population growth is a false economy?"

Is strong economic growth a desirable end on its own? Is not the ultimate goal of government a higher per capita standard of living; that is a per capita outcome, not an aggregate outcome; that is a broader long term social outcome, rather than a short-term, economic metric? The originator of GDP post-Great Depression never intended GDP to be a stand-alone indicator of a country's fortune or success.

Another perspective: where is there current evidence of bigger being better? Where is there current evidence that a denser population is better? How does one compare the success, prosperity, wealth, sustainability, happiness or any other measure between say the Sydney CBD and Bathurst?

Why do we have to become big so that we can compete on scale internationally? This is a commoditisation strategy where the only advantage is volume to achieve low unit costs of production. It is ludicrous that we have to become as big as China and the US to compete on a level playing field, yet this is the presumption of free trade. NAFTA has proven that free market free trade just breeds monopolies allowing the big players to win like the US, while the small ones lose - like Mexico and Canada.

Ought Australia not differentiate based on quality and niche market focus on high value add products and services that we have an existing competitive advantage in?

Immigration is not a panacea to derive more tax revenue to fund our increasing number of retirees. Australia's retiree issue is separate and unrelated, yet one conveniently used to justify increasing immigration. The government should take full control and ownership of a compulsory contribution guaranteed superannuation scheme to ensures that by retirement age each Australian has an indexed pension annuity equivalent to the average real wage (as a minimum). Today that would equate to about $52,000 p.a., and more if one contributed more throughout their working life. (i.e. separate issue, unrelated to immigration).

This issue deserves to be on both national and state agendas, and recognised a the prime driver of social stresses - cost of living, congestion, public infrastructure, social problems, etc.

I am interested in where this new party is going and shall check their site.

What is important, is to separate the issue of the few thousand or so asylum seekers, which is an humanitarian problem and an international one for Australia to engage more proactively in. It is distractive nit picking on less than 1% of the immigration problem. Focus on the other 99%!

Population growth in Australia is primarily driven by economic immigration facilitate by the 457 Visa Programme - the full name being 'Temporary Business (Long Stay) - Standard Business Sponsorship (Subclass 457)'.

A key issue is that certain industries in Australia are seeking skilled workers, yet Gillard's supposed 'Education Revolution' is not matching and timing vocational training to those needs. The bandaid stop gap is for the Australian Givernement to import the skills. But this bandaid job fill has costly triple bottom line implications which the government treats as out of scope of its Immigration responsibility. Governments seemed to have conveniently forgotten the concept of triple bottom line accountability.

Government immigration responsibility continues long after passing through the international arrival gate. The terms of immigration/residency/citizenship, government support, adjustment, training, resettlement, assimilation, acculturation naturally varies on a migrant case by case basis. Immigration needs to start being recognised at this granular level for it to be rich and workable. The full cost of settlement and impact on local society is the real aggregate cost of immigration to Australia.

The same thing is happening in western Sydney...

And of course the likes of the developer lobby which calls itself 'The Urban Taskforce', cries foul over 'high council levies and reams of bureaucratic red tape" in Sydney, which it argues is limiting its frenetic sprawl. It says because of this Melbourne is set to outgrow Sydney. [Red tape, levies drawing Sydney back]

So which city wants to outgrow Shanghai first - Sydney or Melbourne?

I thank Sheila for having raised this critical issue.

The four most charismatic, effective and incorruptible leaders of the 1960's -- President John F Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Robert F Kennedy -- were all murdered. Those who refuse to believe that these four murders could have been just a coincidence are baited by the establishment as "conspiracy theorists".

An example is an article by Bernard Salt "Jackson's death becomes celebrity thriller" of 2 July 2009. (It was published in the Australian on 2 July here, but the story is no longer available.)

However, I did copy some of it to an online forum:

THERE are still questions to be answered about the untimely death of pop singer Michael Jackson and I suspect these questions will continue to be asked long after he has been laid to rest.

The reason is that all the ingredients are gelling for a grand conspiracy theory.

To bake a delicious conspiracy theory, here's what you need: Take a celebrity with global fan appeal but make sure your candidate is aged between 33 and 50 (any younger and they haven't amassed the fan base necessary to incite hysteria after death; any older there's a diminution of the feeling of being robbed by their death). There's no "injustice" in an 80-year-old dropping dead.

The article then goes off to raise other conspiracy theories such as those surrounding the death of Princess Diana, the disappearance of Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt and Elvis faking his own death. It is as if Salt means to imply that all conspiracy theorists unquestioningly accept each and every one of these theories.

This is a technique similar to that employed by Time magazine in its article "Conspiracy Theories" around the same time in July 2009. (See article "Time Magazine: 9/11 Truth lumped in with "The Reptilian Elite" and "Holocaust Revisionism" for further discussion.)

Bernard Salt continues:

But if you really want to create the perfect conspiracy theory, then have a celebrity power figure, say a 46-year-old US president, assassinated in public. And then have the whole thing captured on a single movie camera operated by a middle-aged man with an exotic name such as, oh I don't know, say Abraham Zapruder.

Naturally, Salt takes a swipe of that most taboo of all conspiracy theories, that of 9/11:

Other conspiracy theories question the motives behind global events: the bigger the event the greater the market for an elaborate theory.

Did you know that 9/11 was orchestrated by the CIA so a pretext could be established for George W.Bush to invade Iraq via Afghanistan? And this is because Bush wanted to please his father, who regretted not taking Saddam Hussein out after Desert Storm

Salt's supposed humour appears to be an intellectually cowardly way of avoiding discussing the evidence.

One of many pieces of evidence that proves that Oswald could not have killed Kennedy or, at least could not have killed Kennedy acting alone is to be found on the very film by Abraham Zapruder that Salt alludes to. That evidence is that the fatal shot pushed Kennedy's head backwards and not forwards --- a physical impossibility if the shot had come from behind Kennedy from the Texas Book repository from which Oswald was alleged to have fired the fatal shot.

It seems that those who like to bait JFK assassination theorists avoid mentioning the other assassinations, particularly that of Martin Luther King.

In part this is because a jury trial found that there was a conspiracy to murder Martin Luther King, as Sheila has shown so it is not nearly as easy to dismiss them.

Also, it is because it can be implied (falsely) that President Kennedy was corrupt and tainted by power merely because he held high office and therefore either he somehow got what he deserved anyway or at least his death was no great loss. One who argues the latter is the supposed dissident American intellectual Noam Chomsky.

The same cannot be so easily said of Martin Luther King.

It seems that he was already serving 20 years for armed robbery, but escaped from prison. He was caught trying to leave the country and brought back and charged with the crime. The later investigations by the King family showed that someone else killed King, so that J.E. Ray could not have. He is said to have pled guilty on the advice of his lawyer, even though he was not, in case he was found guilty (despite his innocence), in which case he would risk the electric chair. It doesn't really matter if he was 'guilty of something'; the point is that he wasn't guilty of that crime. Whilst some people might think that his other crimes may have made him fair game, one of the problems with that view is that it means that the real perpetrator escaped. Since the whole thing seems to have been shown beyond doubt to have been a US government organised conspiracy, that makes the crimes against James Earl Ray all the worse - to say the least. J.E. Ray said that he might have inadvertantly done something to help people in his family to assist with the assassination, but that is not what he was on trial for and I don't know any more about that aspect of the story. It seems odd that, even if his brother or other people had been involved partially in the conspiracy and Ray knew something about it, no-one tried to find out more or to convict more people. The state preferred the lone, mad gunman story and the state knew the truth. That's pretty scary, isn't it, because, if the US government conspired to assassinate King and forty years later it hasn't been overturned in disgrace, what does that say about the way we live? From: James Earl Ray Early life James Earl Ray came from a poor family in Alton, Illinois, and left school at age fifteen. He joined the US Army during World War II and served in Germany. He was convicted of his first crime, a burglary in California, in 1949. In 1952 he served two years for armed robbery of a taxi driver in Illinois. In 1955, he was convicted of mail fraud. After an armed robbery in Missouri in 1959, Ray was sentenced to twenty years in prison for repeated offenses. He escaped from prison in 1967 by hiding in a truck transporting bread from the prison bakery.[1] Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Main article: Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. The Lorraine Motel, now known as the National Civil Rights Museum, where King was assassinated Martin Luther King was shot and killed by a sniper on 4 April 1968, while standing on the second-floor balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. Capture and trial On 8 June 1968, a little more than two months after King's death, Ray was captured at London's Heathrow Airport while trying to leave the United Kingdom on a false Canadian passport. At check-in the ticket agent noticed the name on his passport was on a Royal Canadian Police watchlist. He was using the name of Ramon George Sneyd.[2] At the airport, officials noticed that Ray carried another passport under a second name. The UK quickly extradited Ray to Tennessee, where he was charged with King's murder. He confessed to the crime on 10 March 1969, although he recanted this confession three days later. After pleading guilty he was sentenced to ninety-nine years in prison.[3] Ray entered a guilty plea on the advice of his attorney, Percy Foreman, in order to avoid a potential trial conviction, which could have led to a sentence of death. The method of execution in Tennessee at the time would have been electrocution. Ray fired Foreman as his attorney and derisively called him "Percy Fourflusher," thereafter. Ray began claiming that a man he had met in Montreal, who used the alias "Raoul", had been deeply involved, as had his brother Johnny, but that he himself had not. Instead he asserted that he did not "personally shoot Dr. King," but may have been, "partially responsible without knowing it," hinting at a conspiracy. He spent the remainder of his life attempting unsuccessfully to withdraw his guilty plea and secure a trial. 1977 escape On June 11, 1977, Ray made his second appearance on the FBI Most Wanted Fugitives list, this time as the 351st entry. He and six other convicts had escaped from Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary in Petros, Tennessee on June 10, 1977. They were recaptured on June 13, three days later, and returned to prison.[4] A year was added to Ray's previous sentence, to total 100 years. Shortly after, Ray testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations that he did not shoot King. Later developments In 1997, King's son Dexter met with Ray, and publicly supported his efforts to obtain a retrial. Loyd Jowers, a restaurant owner in Memphis, was brought to civil court and sued as being part of a conspiracy to murder Martin Luther King. Jowers was found legally liable, and the King family accepted $100 in restitution, an amount chosen to show that they were not pursuing the case for financial gain. Dr. William Pepper, a friend of King in the last year of his life, represented Ray in a televised mock trial in an attempt to get him the trial he never had. Pepper later represented the King family in a wrongful death civil trial against Loyd Jowers. The King family has since concluded that Ray did not have anything to do with the murder of Martin Luther King.[5] Death Ray died in prison on 23 April 1998, at seventy years of age, from complications related to kidney disease and liver failure caused by hepatitis C. He probably contracted the disease through a blood transfusion given after he sustained a stabbing while at Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary. Ray was survived by seven siblings. His brother Jerry Ray told CNN that his brother did not want to be buried or have his final resting place in the United States because of "the way the government has treated him." Ray was cremated and his ashes were flown to Ireland, the home of his family's ancestors.[6] From: William Pepper "Pepper was the attorney for James Earl Ray, who pled guilty to killing Martin Luther King, Jr.. After conducting his own investigation into the assasination of his friend Pepper agreed to represent James Earl Ray once he had convinced himself that James was innocent. He believes that Ray was framed by the federal government and that King was killed by a conspiracy that involved the FBI, the CIA, the military, the Memphis police and organised crime figures from New Orleans and Memphis. Pepper represented James Earl Ray in a televised mock trial in an attempt to get Ray the trial that he never had. Ray was found not guilty. Pepper then represented the King family in a wrongful death lawsuit, King family vs. Loyd Jowers and "other unknown co-conspirators." During a trial that lasted four weeks Pepper produced over seventy witnesses. Jowers, testifying by deposition, stated that James Earl Ray was a scapegoat and not involved in the assassination. Jowers testified that Memphis police officer Earl Clark fired the fatal shots. On December 8, 1999, the Memphis jury found Jowers responsible and found that the assassination plot included also "governmental agencies." The jury took less than an hour to find in favor of the King family for the requested sum of $100."

I have decided to join Australia First. I shall give them a go since I support their values. I see no reason to support Labor, Liberals, Greens or Nationals, based on their lack of performance. Over the years, I have voted for all of them at one time or another, kidding myself they will bring change. I have had a gut full. If another party presents itself with fresh ideas I will consider that too. JM

I think that the real rorters, who really cost society, are our members of parliament who transfer all our taxes to the corporate sector via works in the service of unwanted, unwarranted and undemocratic population growth. I would be happy to keep every member of the Property Council of Australia and every member of parliament on the dole, as long as they stopped meddling with Australian affairs and allowed us to get started again with a democratic parliament and transparent processes, with the public sector doing all land-use planning and development, with NO fees for service; just public service salaries. This would represent a real saving - both economic and financial. The cost of a few people on the dole is nothing compared to the money that goes to developers, bankers and parasitic parliamentarians, with very few exceptions.

Any chance you can put up a recent photo of the joey Menkit? I'm amazed she has come this far after seeing her injuries. Well done Steve and Rosemary Garlick!