On the plus side, I never have to meet him. He is his own crime and punishment. One day he’ll be dead, hopefully sooner if his consumption preferences have anything to do with it. Personally I say hit the crack pipe and eat huge steaks waved over a bic lighter for 15 seconds. Go boy, go. Show us all how right you are.

Before you set your opinion in concrete, let me off you one ineluctable reality. Your thinking is finite. Economic and population growth comparisons assumes a supposed infinite supply of healthful populations. As you remain solidified in your population control theories, I would invite you to remember that the future is neither deducible nor rational, even your own liberal-leaning hypothetical futurist decline due to humankind overload. Assuming infinite population growth, you suffer the same consequences of Chad’s original argument. Please make sure your own theories are solidified in stone before calling out others based on infinite theory. Just think Igor, what if tomorrow, a virus spread throughout humanity killing half the population of the world? Would this calm you finite theories? Or assume that nothing happens tomorrow, therefore allowing the human race to over populate uncontrollably. Would this make your argument any less severe? Both possibilities result in a pure 50/50 Brownian movement; therefore, both becoming subject to the Zero Sum game. Your point of view, Igor, is no more likely than Chad’s point of view, unless of course the definition of God is also the same definition of Igor. As it stands, Igor, your infinite liberal-leaning, overpopulation, wisdom-laden ideas are no more worthwhile than a Muslim supporting black president.

Before you set your opinion in concrete, let me offer you one ineluctable reality. The earth is finite. Economic and population growth assumes infinite resources. Which one of these two facts do you think is likely to be wrong?

it was a curiously English affair — the hubub becoming hysteria, the polite insistence that everyone has a right to say what they want to say. the only thing i really found distasteful — far more distasteful than griffin himself — was the booing and jeering and points-scoring. making him look like a victim only helped his cause.

there’s a well known polling boost to any party that dominates the day’s headlines — one only needs to look at the recent conference polling on politicalbetting.com to know that even if the news is disastrous, just getting your name heard gets you more votes. Griffin has undoubtedly shored up his ‘core vote’ with his appearance. i don’t think he was changing a lot of minds.

the hysteria gets to me, though. this all comes on the same week as the ONS releases a report saying that Britain will expand by an enormous 10m over the next 20 years, almost all of that expansion coming from immigration or children of immigrants. i for one am tired of being unable to debate the immigration issue without the race card being played. it’s a diversionary tactic of the left to avoid debating the very real issue about the changing structure of the country — as well as the bare-faced lies that have been told to us in the name of the social engineering project that Labour have indulged in over the last decade.

I’ve found this essential reading for any libertarian-leaning readers, should there be any on this blog:

Telegraph — Labour’s mass immigration social engineering project

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

Sean Gabb — Libertarian Alliance — The Conservative Challenge

http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/the-conservative-challenge-by-sean-gabb/

The Times — Influx of migrants will cripple public spending according to MPs (including Labour ones)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6879636.ece

There needs to be a sensible debate on immigration in the UK. alas, so long as the BNP media circus continues, there ain’t gonna be one.