Reclaiming Beauty

Jamie Glazov, of Frontpage Magazine, and now also running the Jamie Glazov Productions, produced by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, was to interview me on my ideas on Reclaiming Beauty.

Below is our email communication.

KPA, June 11, 2013:

Dear Mr. Glazov,

I am a designer and an artist.

My work incorporates many Canadian and American themes.

I am writing a book titled: Reclaiming Beauty.

I would like to know if you will have me on your show to discuss my book, and my larger ideas.

I believe that we are now at an impasse in our Western civilization. I have been chronicling these progressions, both in America and in Canada, at my websites, Our Changing Landscape, Camera Lucida, and most recently at Reclaiming Beauty.

I decided to focus on beauty because it is usually the first to deteriorate where civilization begins to break down.

My book (and website) are not simply chroniclers of events, though. I hope that the book becomes a small guide to show the way out of this impasse. And I hope that the website evolves into a kind of a group movement, where we not only discuss these issues online, but become activists in our communities and societies.

I have lived in Canada (mostly Toronto) for the last twenty years. I have lived in France and England, and a short while in Mexico. I left my country of birth, Ethiopia as a young child.

I have also lived and studied in the United States, in Rutgers University, New Jersey, and the University of Connecticut.

I have a digital arts degree, which includes film and photography, and extensive training in painting, drawing and textile design.

My articles have been printed in Frontpage Magazine, The American Thinker, ChronWatch and in the Botanical Artists of Canada.

Here is my resume:

Here are the preliminary chapters to my book Reclaiming Beauty:

And here are my websites:

Reclaiming Beauty

Camera Lucida

Our Changing Landscape

Kidist P. Asrat Photographs

Kidist P. Asrat Articles

Well Patterned

Thank you for your attention,

Sincerely,

Kidist Paulos Asrat

Glazov, June 11, 2013:

where do you live sir? and what is your political disposition?

KPA, June 13, 2013:

I am "Miss" and not "Sir"! Actually, it is a common mistake.

I live in Toronto, Canada.

You may remember me from articles I have written for Frontpage Magazine. Here is a link to my articles published at FPM.

Kidist

Glazov, June 13, 2013:

Ok thanks Kidist...well the show tapes in L.A.....if you are gonna be in L.A. I would try to work something out to make it happen. Cheers, Jamie.

KPA, June 24, 2013:

Dear Jamie,

I'm working on coming out to LA. I have a chapter I want to write about wine (its aesthetic, religious, gastronomic, etc. aspects) and I am contacting some wine experts in the wine country for interviews.

By the way, does your media company have any funding for guests on its show? I'm trying to secure funds for the plane ride and a few nights in a hotel.

Thanks again for your interest and invitation. I look forward to meeting you.

Kidist

Glazov, June 24, 2013:

Hi Kidist, sorry my friend, our budget is very tight and we do not have the means to pay anything for guests. Wish you the best, Cheers, Jamie.

KPA, July 30, 2013:

Dear Jamie,

Once again, thanks for your interest.

It looks like I will be able to make it to California in late August, early September. I will come over for the day, stay over-night, and leave the next day, after the interview.

Please let me know the exact date that you can put me on your program.

And could you also tell me the exact location of your organization, so that I can start booking a hotel. And if you know of any bed and breakfast type of places, please also let me know.

By the way, I was listening to some of your interviews, and your recent one with Ying Ma really struck a chord. Here is the link to my post Chinese Woman Still in the Ghetto on Reclaiming Beauty. I hope I wasn't too harsh.

Glazov, July 30, 2013:

Hi Kidist, I will be away all August and early September so unfortunately I can't schedule anything for this time. Sincerely, Jamie.

KPA, July 30, 2013:

That's fine. I was working on doing one big trip to the U.S. I have a group meeting with Jim Kalb [and] Orthosphere in mid-late August in NYC, and I thought I could make the trip down to California that way. In fact, after Sept. is better since I can book a low-season ticket/hotel early.

Kidist

Glazov, July 30, 2013:

the genre and plans for the show are changing in the future so i cannot promise anything. sincerely, jamie.

Glazov diplomatically changed his mind about my interview. I think it was because of my post on Reclaiming Beauty Chinese Woman Still in the Ghetto. Here is the link. My post is about Ying Ma, the author of Chinese Girl in the Ghetto, whom Glazov had interviewed on his television show. In the eyes of modern conservatives (and modern people in general) any direct reference to someone's race, and attributing their behaviors to that cultural and racial make-up, is tantamount to racism. I am sure this is how Glazov took my post.

He was so busy admiring the many achievement and activities of Ma, that he overlooked one very important fact: all of Ma's activities center around her "Chineseness." I questioned the wisdom of allowing people like Ma to enter important areas of American politics such as Ma's trip to China with the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. At what point will her loyalties be to America only, and not to some ambiguous connection to China? How can we trust her not to relay vital information to the Chinese, directly or inadvertently?

Ma left China around the same age I left Ethiopia. She came to America as an immigrant (legal immigrant, she is happy to inform us). She left China because her parents were looking for better economic prospects. I left Ethiopia because it was a matter of saving my father's life. We were political dissidents. My father was part of the Haile Selassie regime, and he secured a post in the Paris-based UNESCO months before the regime fell apart, and the brutal and vicious dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam took over. Many of my father's colleagues, and friends, were imprisoned. Some were excecuted. This would have probably been the fate of my father.

But, by the grace of God, we ended up in Paris, the most beautiful city in the world! My young years until my late teens were spent between school holidays in Paris, and boarding school in England. My brothers and I got the best of the Western world. We were hardly wealthy. Most of my father's assets had to remain in Ethiopia (and were later confiscated). We lived in cramped apartments. And UNESCO payed the bills for our primary and secondary education. My parents then sent us to college in the U.S. Only one child could secure UNESCOS's college education assistance (which I received, being the eldest), and later, I managed to get a collection of scholarships and grants which took me through graduate degrees.

Soon after we arrived in Europe, we had very little relations with Ethiopia. There were a handful (three of four) Ethiopian families in France since almost all who left Ethiopia had gone to America. I speak Amharic, but my youngest brother barely speaks it. All my post-Ethiopa life has been immersed in the West. But, it wasn't for lack of opportunities that, for me, Ethiopia was in the background. New York and Los Angeles have a huge hub of Ethiopians. When I went to college in the U.S. at seventeen, I could have resumed "where we left off," and started a whole new chapter of "Ethiopianness" with the huge community in New York, but for I opted to stay away from that. I couldn't understand the nostalgic relation to a country which is so far away, culturally, geographically and for me, emotionally.

My blogs and writing will show that I am a unique (odd, some will say) defender of the West, and Western civilization. I have tried to include some Ethiopian elements, primarily its Christian heritage, but that seems to be the only, significant, point of intersection with my Western-oriented work. I have been asked, both in my writings and in my design work, why I don't focus on Ethiopia. Each time, I have ignored those remarks, or made a quick, dismissive reply in order to be left alone. The questions have never been genuine, and were by people who were in some way trying to belittle Western civilization.

And I have been rewarded for my reticence. I have been discovering the extraordinary gifts of Western art and culture since I was a ten-year-old in Paris.

I have maintained this blog (or series of blogs), without any interruption, and without changing my original message and direction, for abut ten years now. And the fruit of that labor is that my writings have enough articles and thought-out arguments that can be published in a book. I hope that will interest, and attract, a much wider scope of people than blog readers.

The book will not be (is not) a "personal" memoir, a la Hirsi Ali, and now Ma, but a theoretical and cultural analysis of art and culture in our West-phobic world, with the aim to reclaim what has been cast aside, and to revive Western culture to the best of my ability, and the best abilities of those whom I hope will join forces with me.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chinese Woman Still in the Ghetto

Design for book cover of "Chinese Girl in the Ghetto"

The cover is designed by Kristina Phillips, whom Ying Ma credits in her book's acknowledgements. It is not clear what this Chinese character is doing. Is she sweeping, is she flying on a broomstick?

This is en par with the ambiguities of the book. Is Ma writing as a Chinese? Is she writing as and American? Is she happy to portray herself as a Chinese character (the painting is pretty and delicate)?

--------------------------------------------------------------
Jamie Glazov, of Frontpage Magazine, and his news media company Jamie Glazov Productions recently produced a two-part show with a panel discussion on the Zimmerman case.

What especially interested me about this show are his guests, and particularly a guest called Ying Ma, who is identified as the author of Chinese Girl in the Ghetto.

The show has this introduction:

This week’s Glazov Gang had the honor of being joined by Ying Ma, author of Chinese Girl in the Ghetto, Ann-Marie Murrell, the National Director of PolitiChicks.tv, and Tiffany Gabbay, National Development Director for the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The Gang members gathered to discuss Race-Hustling After the Zimmerman Verdict. The discussion also focused on Ying Ma’s memoir Chinese Girl in the Ghetto, which sheds disturbing light on the double standards in our society of what racial violence is discussed and what type is pushed into invisibility.

Ying Ma came to America as a ten-year old. She sounds like an American-born Asian, with her accent-less English. Yet, she identifies herself as "Chinese" in all her communications, and especially in her recently published book Chinese Girl in the Ghetto. The ghetto of her book's title is the black ghetto in Oakland, California, where she immigrated from China. Why didn't she find a way to make an equally dramatic title for her book without emphasizing her Chineseness, but focusing on her Americanness instead?

I think she does so because of her life in the black neighborhood, where she was identified as Chinese and attacked because she was Chinese, by blacks and Hispanics, and how her racial make-up brought racial antagonism and violence towards her by blacks and Hispanics.

Some twenty-five years after those childhood incidents, after excelling in academics and maintaining a successful professional life in America despite her difficult beginnings, she ended up building her own Chinese ghetto.

Here is how Ma describes her professional activities on her website:

Ying Ma (馬穎)...writes regularly about China, international affairs, the free market and conservatism, and much of her research explores the nexus between political and economic freedom with respect to China’s rising influence on the global stage...

Ms. Ma has...managed corporate communications at Sina.com, the first Mainland China-based Internet company to list on the Nasdaq Stock Market; and served on the first professional staff of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a congressional commission established to examine the security implications of America’s economic relationship with China.

From 2007 to 2012, Ms. Ma was a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

In 1998, Ms. Ma served on the staff of an American delegation whose leaders were appointed by former President Bill Clinton and invited by former Chinese President Jiang Zemin to visit China and discuss religious freedom. She traveled with the delegation throughout China and co-drafted the report that the delegation subsequently presented to the U.S. Congress and President Clinton.

What is fascinating about the quote above is the Chinese script that she uses for her name.

Her biography states:

Ms. Ma is fluent in Chinese Mandarin and Cantonese.

If ethnicity is such a problem for her, and if she has to refer to her Chinese ethnicity to validate her career and her life in America, then why doesn't she simply immigrate back to China, rather than change, or redirect, life in America to be more Chinese? The Chinese middle class has now has acquired many of the daily comforts that she didn't have when her family moved to America.

And in view of past evidence of Chinese-American spies infiltrating American companies and universities, how are we to trust Ma not to relay important, classified, information to her Chinese counter-parts in China? The evidence shows that she is a likely candidate:
- She is fluent in two Chinese languages
- Her university degree is in "Government" so she has good knowledge on the workings and functions of government
- She was involved in and employed by a China-based information technology company
- Her book relates her life in terms of her Chinese background
- She writes articles with China as the focus
- She served in the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission
- She is a policy advisor on China
- Her current job focussing on Chinese businesses in the U.S. as senior vice president of SDB Partners
- Her SDB role also states that she "assists international companies in developing positive relations with U.S. government agencies.." This sounds like a guarded way of including Chinese companies, without naming specific countries.

She clearly maintains Chinese contacts through her professional and editorial activities. And her life in general is focussed around China and her Chinese background. But her position on China is ambiguous and strained. On the one hand, she forthrightly acknowledges the many problems with China, yet on the other hand, she gives many green lights for the U.S. to nonetheless pursue economic relations with this secretive, and potentially dangerous, country.

Her book's unofficial sub-heading is "A story about defeating the welfare state," which are the words she's posted above the information on her book at her website. Yet, the table of contents doesn't indicate that this is the book's focus. The social conscience she wants us to obtain from her writing seems like wishful thinking and a guilty reappraisal of her criticism. Or to add a bit of political and social seriousness to another dime a dozen memoir. It seems like both a marketing and a political strategy.

Ma writes nothing personal in her articles, her "personal blog" and her social media sites. This is odd, considering she has penned a book that appears to be very personal. A link at her blog is titled "My Favorites," which ends up being her favorite interviews and articles! What is it about America that she likes besides having this "freedom" to do whatever she wants? What is her favorite movie? What favorite restaurant does she frequent? What novels does she read when she's not working through her policy manuals? What paintings does she admire? What kinds of foods does she know how to cook?

This blogger has provided an excerpt of the kind of personal details I was looking for elsewhere. But the precious, personal item she covets is a pencil she received from a friend in China:

When Ying Ma comes to America she experiences theft for the first time. She encounters a situation [over which] she has no control due to the language barrier between her and her classmates. Three classmates steal her pencil that was a gift from her friends back in China and is very significant to her. When she can’t defend herself or communicate with her classmates who steal her pencil she turns to Cindy, another classmate who also speaks Chinese. Cindy translates to the teacher what happened and the teacher confronts the classmates, but they deny stealing anything. The teacher has no proof so she moves on from the incident and tries to replace Ying Ma’s special gift with an ordinary #2 pencil. Ying Ma is infuriated when she sees the classmates are not being punished for what they did. Her anger turns to hate, “I hated the three thieves. I hated their poverty, which had inspired then to covet my possession and conspired with them to take it from me. I hated their parents, who had failed to teach them that being poor was no excuse to steal. I hated myself for not adequately guarding an irreplaceable gift and for not doing all that I could have done to retrieve it once it was gone” (Ma 82).

And in another article, the author excerpts Yang's "nail polish" story that Yang uses as an example of the things one cannot have in communist China. Yang doesn't look like a woman (serious conservative and all) who would regularly wear nail polish. So rather than mention the nail polish as an aesthetic desire, she inflates the story, and the nail polish, into a communist-forced "equality" episode. Now in America, she can have all the nail polish she wants, and for what?

It is very easy to provide a distant, impersonal portrait. Then she can get judged on the "rightness" of her endeavors. But it is also (perhaps especially) the small details make the man (or woman). And we have none of that from her.

I speculate that she cannot find these "favorites" to disclose. She may really not have any, or they may be few and insubstantial, like the nail polish story. Therefore, I once again question her commitment to America as a place, rather than America as the idea of freedom and liberation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert Spencer's One-Way, Wishful-Thinking Dialogue With Muslims

Robert Spencer interview by The Arena's Michael Coren on May 2, 2013

Robert Spencer is a regular guest on Michael Coren's The Arena. He was on last night to discuss his new book, the Boston bombings and other Islam-related news.

His new book is titled Not Peace But a Sword: The Great Chasm Between Christianity and Islam. It is clearly an important book. I am sure the erudition and study of Spencer will bring more knowledge to the fore-front.

But, I've said before that it is not enough to go on this disorganized, arms-outstretched mode of dealing with Islam in the West. And sure enough, during the interview, Spencer defends "dialogue" between Christians and Muslims, although he does makes some kind of disclaimer that Muslims are not interested in dialogue, but in subjugation of non-Muslims.

Michael Coren gives him a lead with:

Those people who say well all religions produce extremism. It's not the religion, it's the people who misinterpret it. You make in an extremely informed way the argument that no I'm sorry, I'm sorry, these religions are very, very different.

Spencer replies:

And people who engage in dialogue - that's what this book is about - between Christians and Muslims should be informed. I'm not saying that there should be no dialogue, but they should be aware of the contempt in which Christianity is portrayed in the Koran, and how that then informs their dialogue [I couldn't decipher this last word].

As I wrote about Pamela Geller, and her confusions and contradictions, Spencer, who would like nothing else than a "dialogue" with Muslims realizes that they have a deep-seated contempt for him, nonetheless revels in the same kind of wishful thinking as Geller, and would actually venture out to meet these people who have this deep contempt for him as mandated by their holy book.

What kind of lunatic is that!

I found the list of chapters in Spencer's new book (at this source - pdf file).

They are:

1. Time for an `Ecumenical Jihad'?

2. Three Great Abrahamic Faiths?

3. The same God?

4. The Same Jesus?

5. Are We All Muslims Now?

6. A Common Desire for Justice?

7. A Shared Sexual Ethic?

8. An Honest Desire for Dialogue?

Epilogue

Appendix

The (first) striking think about these chapters is that every single one of them ends with a question mark. Which of course leads to the second (more important) striking thing where Spencer looks like he's trying to join these two religions, despite his agreement with Michael Coren that the two religions are "very, very different"

One senses that he really wants "a shared ethic" and that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, and that we are all Muslims (as in we are all black, or all poor, or all women, which is a way of raising up who one perceives to be a "victim" and equalizing him.

In his confused way, he must realize that it is Christians like him who have "an honest desire for dialogue" and not the hard-headed, Koran-mandated Muslims. But, there is no harm in wishful thinking, or is there?

Of course there is. It is a recipe for dhimmitude at its best, and annihilation at its worst.

The prominent spokesmen against Islamic incursions into the West these days are Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. Other spokesmen like Sam Solomon, Bat Ye'or, are keeping a low profile. I think their silence is their realization that more books, and more conferences, and more speeches in a synagogues are not going to going to improve anything. At least I hope that is what their silence means, and that it is coupled with founding a new strategy.

How many more books can we read, and how many more dramatic presentations can we participate in, before the Islamic message becomes clear?

We know enough already, and if not, as I've said, there is a myriad of available information that we can tap into. I think it is time to retreat, to consolidate this information, to form concrete, organized and effective measures to fight against Islam's incursions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Amazon.com reviewer has read and reviewed the book. I don't know who William Garrison Jr. is, but his notes make for an interesting read.

Chapter 1. Time for an `Ecumenical Jihad'?

Mr. Spencer counters the 1996 book "Ecumenical Jihad", in which its author Peter Kreeft heralded: "The age of religious wars is ending". Mr. Spencer notes that today's on-going lethal Islamic jihad attacks against Christians from Nigeria eastward to Pakistan. Mr. Spencer claims "this religious bigotry, hatred, and violence are legitimized by holy writ: The Qur'an and other Islamic texts and teachings" (p. 19) - he proceeds to cite chapter [sura] and verse [aya]. And exemplifies how hundreds of thousands of Christians have and are fleeing Islamist-dominated Middle Eastern countries. Mr. Spencer quotes the Muslim sources commanding death for those apostates [murtadd] who convert to Christianity. Subtopics: `A tradition of persecution', `The silence of human rights groups', & `Saladin: myth versus reality'.

Chapter 2. Three Great Abrahamic Faiths?

Mr. Spencer explains that while the Bible identifies the "10 Commandments" that were revealed to Moses [Musa], none is stated in the Qur'an. Pertaining to the Jewish Exodus, the Qur'an informs us that Sabbath-breaking Jews were transformed into "Jew-apes" [gird] - a concept that does not appear in the Bible (p. 43). The author details the differences between how the Bible reveals the "original sin" of Adam & Eve, whereas the Qur'an rejects this concept. Mr. Spencer states how Muslims believe that the original Islam-oriented Bible was "corrupted" by Jews & Christians to lead people away from `the Straight Path' [al-sirat ul-mustaqim] of Islam.

Chapter 3. The same God?

Herein Mr. Spencer questions why the Second Vatican Council concluded that the Judeo-Christian "God" is the same as the Muslim "Allah" (p. 54). He reviews why Muslims do not believe that Jesus was the son of God, why they deny the Trinity, and why "Allah is not a `Father'". He notes that Pope Benedict XIV, in 1754 "reaffirmed an earlier prohibition of Albanian Catholics giving their `Turkish or Mohammedan names' in baptism" (p. 57). Mr. Spencer proceeds to explain how Muslims view Allah, and discusses some Islamic views regarding `free will' versus Allah's powers (pp. 69-76).

Chapter 4. The Same Jesus?

We read that Muslims respect Jesus [Isa] because he is mentioned as a prophet in the Qur'an. Mr. Spencer reviews the issue "then why aren't Muslims Christians?" and how Gnostics may have influenced Muhammed to proclaim that Jesus was not actually crucified (p. 87). Mr. Spencer details various inconsistencies that he perceives are within the Qur'an. More importantly, the author explains how Muslims perceive that at the "End of Days" [qiyama] the true Islam-oriented Jesus [Isa] will return to save mankind from Christianity by destroying it! (p. 100).

Chapter 5. Are We All Muslims Now?

Mr. Spencer argues that "Islam treats Christianity as a perversion of the original teaching of Jesus.... This robs Christianity of any legitimate manifestation; to Islam, all Christians are essentially apostate Muslims" (p. 103). Pertaining to the prophet Abraham [Ibrahim], the Qur'an stipulates: "Abraham in truth was not a Jew, neither a Christian; but he was a Muslim..." (Q3:67), in fact, the Quran rules that all of the prophets [nabiyyun] mentioned in the Bible were all Muslims.

Chapter 6. A Common Desire for Justice?

In this chapter Mr. Spencer disputes Westerners who "think the Islamic world has something to teach today's decadent West. Yet although it is obvious that Christians should learn `the absoluteness of the moral laws and of the demand to be just and charitable,' it is far less clear that Muslims have these laws to teach, or believe them themselves" (p. 116). The author lists numerous examples of whereby the Muslim Prophet Muhammed (al- insane al-kamil) himself engaged in either various violent military campaigns or personal crimes against those who disbelieved him.

Chapter 7. A Shared Sexual Ethic?

While finding some commonality regarding sexual ethics between Christians and Muslims, Mr. Spencer opined: "... and there are other apparent moral similarities between the two religions, [but] the Muslim understanding of marriage and sexual morality differs so greatly from Christian understanding that it renders those similarities void of meaning.... What's more, Islamic morality allows for practices that Catholicism abhors, including contraception, child marriage, polygamy, female genital mutilation, and even sexual slavery of non-believing women." (p. 139).

Chapter 8. An Honest Desire for Dialogue?

In this section Mr. Spencer discusses various attempts to bring about "discussion" between the faiths, let alone "assimilation" of Christianity and Islam, and explains why the two cannot be married.

Epilogue

A transcript of the Nov. 2010 kind, erudite and spirited debate (more of a polite discussion) between the author and Mr. Peter Kreeft regarding whether or not peaceful coexistence is possible between Muslims and Westerners.

Appendix

Lists "Some Fundamental Differences Between Islam and Christianity" regarding (1) The nature of God, (2) Jesus, (3) e revelation, & (4) the Moral Law.

Alas, no attribution is given to the book-jacket's designer; again, I am impressed with its cover depicting an old curved dagger [khanjar] with Muhammed's name engraved three times upon it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Serious Talk While Maneuvering Mini-Skirts

I was looking forward to listening to Diana West's interview at the Presidential Speakers Series sponsored by Embry Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona where she discusses her upcoming book American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation's Character. The youtube video is an hour long, actually an hour and a half, so I found a long stretch of time where I could stay uninterrupted. The first couple of minutes of the video showed me this:



I stopped the video, and went back to the website to see if there was any transcript or a review of the interview. I wasn't going to watch West maneuver a mini-skirt, perched on a low sofa. I was disappointed. Actually, I was angry. I don't see how a middle-aged woman can sit with exposed thighs during a serious interview about a scholarly book.

It's a pity I didn't see West's C-Span interview first, which is posted at West's website, although she's wearing the irritating, ubiquitous pants.



Here is a video where West is being interviewed by the Canadian Michael Coren on his program The Arena. It is a "talking head" video, which is how Coren presents all his interviews. That is probably the best way to conduct such interviews, so our distraction (from the stage, seating, the suits and dresses, etc.) is minimal, and we really do concentrate on what people are saying.

What all this means is that whatever women wear, or do to their hair and their make-up, will be up for scrutiny, and their very presence will detract from the message they wish to convey. And all women will want to "look good," so they themselves, including the serious ones like West, contribute to the visually biased way they are perceived.

I've read West's Death of the Grown up, and wrote on it at Camera Lucida:

I just finished reading Diana West's brilliant book "The Death of the Grown-Up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization". It is wittily written, and connects many unlikely, but under West's pen, quite convincing, dots. She attributes this death of the grown up to the "birth of the teenager", which she says occurred around WWII. At this time, teenagers' sudden economic ascendancy gave them financial clout and independence to determined everything from pop music to fashion, and where they would go with their newly bought cars, without their parents’ presence, or even rules. But I think her rather mildly argued idea that all this might have started during the War, rather than after, more original. Young boys, left behind without the role model of fathers, and with the changing roles of their working mothers, shifted their attitudes about maleness that made the supremacy of the teenager possible. She writes:

Many of these youngsters...had experienced the war as a period of uprootedness: "Shepherded by women, they moved through strange cities and new schools, with only their teenage scenes in which to make sense of the world" [writes Phillih H. Ennis, rock and roll historian].

And who gave them this teenaged centeredness? None other than Elvis Presley, who:

[W]as too young to have seen action in either World War II or Korea. As a result, he gained prominence as a peacetime idol independent of "the adults who guided the nation through the great war." [This gave Presley] a connection with the younger generation of children, kids whose fathers and older brothers had gone to war.

Those future teenagers, guided by rock 'n' roll and an independent capacity to make their own money, which they used for their own enjoyment including buying their own records, no longer needed (or more accurately, allowed) their parents to intervene in their lives. West's last two chapters deal with our current war against Islam. She attributes our inability to face this war head on to our lost adulthood. So, a cultural abnormality becomes a civilizational disability, which may prevent us from standing up, like true soldiers, to fight this epic battle of our lives. Ultimately, West gives us hope that by identifying and recognizing the problem, as she has done so succinctly, we can be lulled out of our false childhood, and return to our normal and necessary maturity.

Like Pamela Geller, another prominent woman who writes books and appears on television shows (whose celebrity-chic style I briefly mention here), West is also keenly in tune with the encroachment of Islam in American life, and writes about it in her website and articles. Perhaps it is the stages on which they appear - television shows, radio interviews, conferences in exotic locations - that gives these women the impression that they need to glamorize their appearances. And ultimately, what woman doesn't want to look good, if not pretty and beautiful, whatever she's doing?

These are examples of how women are unsuited to public and political lives.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shifting Towards Oblivion: No Place to Stand, No Place to Grow*

A Canadian Dhimmi and his Canadian Contribution
(By the way, the "T" of "Shift" is deliberately designed to bleed off the book cover.
This is a cleaver way of "shifting" the text, and its meaning along. Out of the picture?)

* The second part of this post's title comes from Ontario's national anthem:

Give us a place to stand
And a place to grow
And call this land Ontario.
A place to live
For you and me
With hopes as high
As the tallest tree.
Give us a land of lakes
and a land of snow
And we will build Ontario
A place to stand, a place to grow
Ontario!

From western hills,
To northern shores.
To Niagara Falls,
Where the waters roar.
Give us a land of peace,
Where the free winds blow.
And we will build Ontario
A place to stand, a place to grow
Ontario!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Ibbitson at the 4.58 point of the interview on Television Ontario
"I'm an optimist"

John Ibbitson, of the New Canadian Conservative (my label), is being interviewed by the astute and intelligent Steve Paiken of Television Ontario (TVO) - video of the full interview here). He has just written a book called The Big Shift: The Seismic Change In Canadian Politics, Business, And Culture And What It Means For Our (Darrett Bicker and John Ibbitson, 2013).

The cover of the book is worth noting. It has the Canadian flag, but instead of the red and white, it is blue and white. I cannot find any explanation for this, other than Ibbitson's underhanded way of saying that Canada is turning away from Liberal Red to Tory Blue.

This Toronto Star writer concurs:

Anyone who has been paying attention to the so-called “visuals” of governance from Ottawa these past few years cannot help but notice the efforts to change the colour of Canada from Liberal red to Tory blue.

Here is the definition of the Blue Tories:

Blue Tories, also known as small 'c' conservatives, are, in Canadian politics, members of the former federal Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, current Conservative Party of Canada and provincial Progressive Conservative parties who are more economically right wing. Prior to the 1960s, these Conservatives were most identified with the Montreal and Toronto commercial elite who took positions of influence within the Progressive Conservative Party. Since the mid-1970s, they have been heavily influenced by the neo-liberal movement. Blue Tories tend to favour neo-liberal policies such as devolution of federal power to the provincial governments, a reduced role for government in the economy, reduction of taxation and similar mainstream neoconservative ideals. The term Blue Tory does not refer to social conservatism.[Source: Wikipedia]

And of the Red Tories:

A Red Tory is an adherent of a particular political philosophy, tradition, and disposition in Canada somewhat similar to the High Tory tradition in the United Kingdom.[Source: Wikipedia]

And

High Toryism is a term used in Britain, Canada, Australia and elsewhere to refer to a traditionalist conservatism which is in line with the Toryism originating in the 17th century. High Tories and their worldview are sometimes at odds with the more liberal and cosmopolitan elements of the Conservative Party in these countries at present.[Source: Wikipedia]

This Globe and Mail journalist, who has lived his whole career moving further away from his people and his country, is revealed conclusively to be a willing apologist for the formidable non-white population that is now ready to take over and replace him and his country. He's doing so without a fight and not even a whimper, but with a dhimmitized acquiescence. He is willing and ready to shift.

And the new, replacement population is formidable. It wants nothing less than replacement of whites by non-whites from China, India, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. The most vocal, prominent and so-far successful groups are those from China (and their offspring) and India (and their offspring).

Still, Ibbitson is a sorry example for whites. His unkempt hair, his lop-sided tie, his haggard features, and above all, his soft but panicked eyes show us that he is petrified of what will happen. But his multicultural ideology, his belief in "equality," and his probable gastronomical indulgence in ethnic foods which these immigrants bring right to his doorway, doesn't let him realize the utter danger he is in. He ends up writing a book which he titles The Big Shift which exposes every corner of his mushy brain for the fallacies it holds.

Below are excerpts from the TVO interview which pertain to immigrants, immigration and multiculturalism.

Ibbitson says:

The Lauratian elites [those governing elites in Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and other cities along the St. Lawrence River or its watershed] doesn't [sic] realize that Canada no longer belongs to them. A country that was once part of the Atlantic world is becoming part of the Pacific world. The provinces that mattered most don't matter as much any more. The country's center has shifted west, and the power has shifted with it. In fact, power is now shared by two groups: Westerners, and Ontario's suburban middle class, especially the immigrant suburban middle class. In terms of power and priorities, nothing else and no-one else is as important.

The astute interviewer of The Agenda, Steve Paiken, who hosts the show, asks Ibbitson:

Do you feel bad about that?

Ibbitson replies:

No. It's not that I don't like the Canada that the Laurentian elites created. In fact I love the Canada that the Laurentian elites created.

And here's the zinger:

I love especially the multiculturalism that they created. The fact that we did open our doors, as no other country on earth has opened its doors, to so many people, from so many places. But they're [current immigrants] not the people who came here, for example, after the Second World War. They're not the people like my ancestors who came here after the First World War. They have different priorities, different interests. Some of them are different from mine. What I love is the fact that they are seizing the country. And they are seizing the agenda. And they are driving us forward. And I do believe it is forward. I love the idea that the west is no longer a region; it is the new center. I love the idea that Canada is becoming a Pacific nation rather than an Atlantic nation. There are things that I regret. But I'm essentially an optimist. I'm an optimist especially about the fact that new immigrant Canadians are embracing the country and driving a kind of nationalism, a patriotism even, that our generation was embarrassed ever to embrace. So on the whole I think it is a good thing.

And later:

One of the things the Laurentian elites always believed was that Canada was fragile. It could break up at any moment. Ungovernable. It was like a humming bird. Theoretically it can't fly and yet it does. So, yes, there is a shift in power. Yes, one region that used to be peripheral is becoming central. But that doesn't make the country any less governable. It's going to make changes, absolutely. One of the things we talk about in the book is the "Ottawa River Curtain" where everything east of the Ottawa River - Quebec and Atlantic Canada - they're not bringing in immigrants. They're not even trying very hard, frankly, to bring in immigrants. Their population in consequence are aging and declining. Their economies are aging and declining. And the assumption that the Laurentianites have maintained, which is that there would be inter-regional transfers of wealth from the richer parts of the country to the poorer parts of the country, I don't think that these immigrant Canadians themselves embrace. They want to know why. Why is money going to these people? Why is seasonal industry considered so important? Why must the equalization program be what it is? So there are going to be challenges, there are going to be tensions, there are going to be stresses. But we've never been farther away on a Quebec referendum on separation than we are right now, even with a PQ government in Quebec. And I think it cannot weaken the country to have the west now not only in, but running the place. A region that was considered itself to be on the periphery at one time.

Paiken asks:

I want to ask about that coalition. How do South Asian immigrants living in Toronto's suburbs have anything in common with white rural voters, or westerners? Because that's the coalition I gather, right?

Ibbitson:

I guess the alternative coalition is what you want to oppose as an opposite...Those suburban immigrant voters in the (905) [telephone area code] are from China, are from India are from Philippines, are from Pacific nations. They are themselves here, succeeding, and wanting to succeed more. Those values are far more in alignment with the values in Calgary, and even Vancouver, and even Winnipeg...than they are with the notions of redistribution of incomes, protection of declining and diminishing populations and economies in the west. I don't see how you get (905) immigrant voters to make common cause with Quebec and Atlantic voters. I see every reason why they would make common cause with western voters. In fact, I see every reason why Ontario, because of immigration, is becoming what we call a Pacific and not Atlantic province.

Further on:

The demographic fundamentals favor the conservatives. And the issues favor the conservatives. Actually not the issues, there's just one, there's the economy. And because of the recession, and because immigrant Canadians are rightly, focused on improving the quality of their own lives, improving their incomes, improving the chances for their own children, the economy is the one that trumps all the other issues.

Ibbitson finally talks about the "deep patriotism" these "new immigrants" have for Canada. Of course they will defend all the gains that they enjoy: good schools, jobs, clean air, safe highways, friendly Ibbitson-types, groceries and stores full of (good) goods, and T.V. with 100+ stations. What's not to love? If these are gone, then their whole enterprise has failed.

But, there is also another "patriotism" that comes from these immigrants, and it is based on anti-Americanism. The hostility towards America that many Canadians have is doubly manifested in these immigrants. They come hating America, and have found the ideal location, a country almost like America, where they can grow their clinging roots, and realize their mostly materialistic opportunities.

So, I expect anti-Americanism, and its corollary, anti-Westernism, which also includes anti-Canadianism, which ultimately means anti-whitism, to grow even more with the coming generations as these new immigrants multiply into several generations.

And at some point, both immigrants and whites are going to realize that there are other identifiable issues like culture, language, religion that will start to take-over materialistic ones. I agree that immigrants come here to "make a better life." Ibbitson's ancestors also came over after WWI probably for the same reason. But they came to live within the constraints of the new country they arrived in. They didn't plan to, or want to, change it. And they in fact improved it.

Now immigrants, while with one hand reaping the wealth of the country, are giving it nothing back either economically or culturally. It is a fallacy that these current immigrants are making Canada wealthier, and it is a fallacy that their cultures are improving what we have. In fact there is a net loss on all counts.

So, ultimately, current immigrants are like parasites, Taking away, feeding off the blood, but giving nothing substantial back. But their agenda is bigger. It is a re-establishment of those cultures they left behind on the ready-made, wealthy and abundant Canadian soil. But in doing so, they are also destroying those very Canadian qualities that urged them to pack their bags and fly (no-one takes ships anymore) over.

Poor Ibbitson. Poor Canada. Oh Chanada!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------