It must be hell living in a crowded country like India! Or China! Or England!

Today’s blog follows on from yesterday’s about population density.

As the migrant swarm swarms in our direction, the professional hand-wringers and preachy, more-pious-than-thou opinion leaders are squawking and bleating about how Britain has a ‘moral responsibility’ to accept thousands upon thousands of migrants (most of whom hate us and will do all they can to destroy our society).

One of the arguments used by the so-called ‘progressives’ in politics and the media is that only around ten percent of Britain’s land is built on and so we have lots of room to house the seemingly limitless migrant hordes. But how true is that?

When most of us think of countries like China with its massive population of 1,371,722,000 or India with its 1,276,180,000 we probably think we’re fortunate to live in ‘England’s green and pleasant land’.

But we would be wrong. Britain may not be particularly crowded. But England, where most migrants will want to stay, is. I was extremely surprised to find that England is actually more crowded than India and has more than three times as many people per square kilometre as China:

(I have given two figures for England’s population density because, as two readers helpfully pointed out yesterday, official figures for our population are at least ten million lower than estimates made by various commercial and farming organisations)

So, do we really have room for a few hundred thousand more primitive, backward, religiously bigoted, violent, parasitic Third Worlders? Not if you go by England’s population density.

After all, is there really much difference now between:

India’s teeming, crowded, excrement-covered cities?

China’s teeming, crowded cities?

And our major cities?