The art of deception

[Slim]

Let's see where this goes.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pc...rtisan-agenda/

First piss-Christ, then Maplethorpe and now this. This isnt art. Its propaganda.

The issue is using tax dollars to fund a group being told what sort of "art" to do by the current administration.

I dont like it.

[keith]

I dont like it.

[Digital Analog]

First piss-Christ, then Maplethorpe and now this. This isnt art. Its propaganda.

Get it right, Maplethorpe was first, then Piss Christ

[Hauptman]

Let's see where this goes.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pc...rtisan-agenda/

First piss-Christ, then Maplethorpe and now this. This isnt art. Its propaganda.

The issue is using tax dollars to fund a group being told what sort of "art" to do by the current administration.

I dont like it.

Art often has a message, and that message can be political; in of itself, that is not automatically a bad thing.

Anti-establishment art gets more attention because art in support of the powers-that-be is ubiquitous.

[chase]

typical.

idiot who isnt smart enough to get a real job draws art.

nobody wants crappy art.

artist is hungry.

fascist dictator in the making sees artist and offers money to artist to draw propaganda.

maybe im to cynical but that did not suprise me at all.

[noodle]

typical.

idiot who isnt smart enough to get a real job draws art.

nobody wants crappy art.

artist is hungry.

fascist dictator in the making sees artist and offers money to artist to draw propaganda.

maybe im to cynical but that did not suprise me at all.

seriously? you call obama a socialist in one thread and a fascist in another? you do realize they're not interchangeable right?

[fencerchica]

seriously? you call obama a socialist in one thread and a fascist in another? you do realize they're not interchangeable right?

Movement conservatism has been waging a PR war for some time now attempting to falsely conflate socialism with fascism with liberalism. Their point man last year was a mouthbreathing recipient of wingnut welfare (i.e. a talentless hack who lived on the largesse of the conservative think-tank network) named Jonah Goldberg. He wrote a book called Liberal Fascism, for people just like Chase. The central thesis seems to be that "fascism is just any generic kind of totalitarianism" and "liberals are totalitarian because they support regulation", and thus "liberals are fascists, QED".

[Slim]

Art often has a message, and that message can be political; in of itself, that is not automatically a bad thing.

Anti-establishment art gets more attention because art in support of the powers-that-be is ubiquitous.

Not a problem. Take my avatar as an example. It's brilliant. But it was not funded by a grant from the NEA.

The Obama administration is telling the NEA how to spend their money and on what type of art they expect to come out of it. Of course you dont have a problem with this since you're ok with their agenda.

[Hauptman]

Not a problem. Take my avatar as an example. It's brilliant. But it was not funded by a grant from the NEA.

The Obama administration is telling the NEA how to spend their money and on what type of art they expect to come out of it. Of course you dont have a problem with this since you're ok with their agenda.

lol... I guess "brilliant" is in the eye of the beholder.

But your conclusion of what is going on between the administration and the NEA is a broad bit of speculation and inference based on a slanted article that is full of speculation and inference. What is lacking is the inclusion of clear statements of fact.

I however don't think that is an indication of conservative thinking; only sloppy thinking.

[Inquartata]

Movement conservatism has been waging a PR war for some time now attempting to falsely conflate socialism with fascism with liberalism.

Are you familiar with the theory that the political spectrum is not a line but a circle? And that in terms of practical outcomes fascism and totalitarian communism are almost indistinguishable?

How different were Stalin and Mussolini ( to avoid Godwin I omit the customary comparison ) in terms of what they did in the real world, as opposed to the philosophies they spouted?

[fencerchica]

Are you familiar with the theory that the political spectrum is not a line but a circle? And that in terms of practical outcomes fascism and totalitarian communism are almost indistinguishable?

How different were Stalin and Mussolini ( to avoid Godwin I omit the customary comparison ) in terms of what they did in the real world, as opposed to the philosophies they spouted?

Stalin's and Mussolini's states shared certain characteristics because both shared in a totalitarian nature; totalitarianism is the antithesis of liberalism.

The economic and ideological structures of Stalin's and Mussolini's states were quite dissimilar from one another even though the totalitarianism which they had in common produced a bottom-line impact to their peoples' level of freedom that was (somewhat) similar (herein lies the circular visualization). Furthermore, neither of them had anything in common with liberalism.

[Inquartata]

Stalin's and Mussolini's states shared certain characteristics because both shared in a totalitarian nature; totalitarianism is the antithesis of liberalism.

Yes.

And both fascism and communism are totalitarism, no?

The economic and ideological structures of Stalin's and Mussolini's states were quite dissimilar from one another even though the totalitarianism which they had in common produced a bottom-line impact to their peoples' level of freedom that was (somewhat) similar (herein lies the circular visualization). Furthermore, neither of them had anything in common with liberalism.

Which liberalism? The socialist or fascist form?

[Hauptman]

The problem is that socialism is an economic model while fascism is a political model. Combine the two (totalitarian socialism) and you have communism.

But then it gets even more complicated because ideologically communism is not the same as the Soviet, Chinese, or Cuban models of communism that we are familiar with.

Possible we only see totalitarian socialism (communism) because the people wouldn't go for a pure socialist state without being forced to.

Now if we could just get people to acknowledge that pure capitalism is as flawed as pure socialism then we might actually start making progress again.

[Inquartata]

That's like saying that unicorns are as flawed as dragons. Since none of them actually exist, it's a moot question.

[migopod]

That's like saying that unicorns are as flawed as dragons. Since none of them actually exist, it's a moot question.

Existence isn't a prerequisite for debate, is it? People have been debating theology for simply ages!


In any event, it's been well established that dragons are more flawed than unicorns.

[Hauptman]

That's like saying that unicorns are as flawed as dragons. Since none of them actually exist, it's a moot question.

Maybe they don't exist, but try telling that to all the zero-regulation, free-market capitalists we have in the U.S.!!

[fencerchica]

The bottom line is that the institutions of movement conservatism (National Review, et al) are deliberately pushing falsehoods such as socialism=fascism=liberalism for the eager consumption of the intellectually lazy, such as Chase. And sure enough, here he is repeating them back like the good little parrot he is.

[Hauptman]

The bottom line is that the institutions of movement conservatism (National Review, et al) are deliberately pushing falsehoods such as socialism=fascism=liberalism for the eager consumption of the intellectually lazy, such as Chase. And sure enough, here he is repeating them back like the good little parrot he is.

Too true.

[jessicasimpson]

That's like saying that unicorns are as flawed as dragons. Since none of them actually exist, it's a moot question.

You need to believe harder

[Slim]

lol... I guess "brilliant" is in the eye of the beholder.

Isnt that what art is all about?

But your conclusion of what is going on between the administration and the NEA is a broad bit of speculation and inference based on a slanted article that is full of speculation and inference. What is lacking is the inclusion of clear statements of fact.

I however don't think that is an indication of conservative thinking; only sloppy thinking.

Really now?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...uidelines.html

Something certainly wasn't appropriate.