Macro Artist – Why most “Art” sucks and has A political agenda?

Modern Abstract Art Jackson Pollock (foto * ČŔĂĨĞ ČŔĂŦŤ * | Tumbir)

Why most “Art” sucks and has A political agenda?

Part (1)



Have you ever wondered why most Art sucks and has A political agenda? This thread should help.

OSS Wartime propaganda applied domestically by the CIA; early experiments in cultural manipulation and the sabotage of aesthetic & intellectual integrity.


The primary reason that most of the Art presented to the public sucks is because the CIA has been manipulating Art and culture since its inception. Let S dig A little deeper.


The CIA was founded in 1947 following the conclusion of WWII. One of the agency S immediate goals was to continue the OSS S objective of controlling the flow of news and information available to the public (OSS: Office of Strategic Services it was the predecessor to the CIA).


Rather than curtail the OSS program following the end of WWII, the CIA expanded the program into the comprehensive disinformation campaign known as “Project Mockingbird.” The CIA S expansion of information control now extended beyond the news and into the cultural realm.


Utilizing American Art  to alter public consciousness was perhaps conceived of in 1941 by MOMA Director John Hay Whitney (the MOMA could act as A weapon for national defense too), educate, inspire, & strengthen the hearts & wills of free men in defense of their own freedom.”


Added import is attached to Whitney S statement because during WWII Whitney was an OSS agent and at the War S conclusion he reassumed A prominent position at MOMA.


The first attempt to openly manipulate public aesthetic opinion was A 1947 State Department program called Advancing American Art dedicated to paying the touring expenses for an international exhibition of Abstract Expressionist painters.


The program was forced to be cancelled as it was viewed as A wasteful fraud by the public as well as members of the Government. President Harry S Truman stated, “If that S art, then I M A Hottentot.” A congressman added, I am just A dumb American who pays for this type of trash.”


Having failed at its overt attempt to manipulate public opinion, A faction of the government endeavored to covertly manipulate its citizenry. The CIA S foray into cultural manipulation began with former OSS Officer Frank Wisner and the Propaganda Assets Inventory.


The PAI was A division within the CIA dedicated to the Worldwide promotion of selected artists & intellectuals. Having absorbed the OSO (Office of Special Operations) Media assets, at its peak the PAI controlled the messaging for over 800 major news outlets in the country.


The PAI was also known as “Wisner S Wurlitzer” as Wisner could use his vast network of controlled Media sources to present whatever narrative he wanted the public to hear, see and read.


Wisner S media cartel was widespread, Pease writes.

The network included journalists, columnists, book publishers, editors, entire organizations such as Radio Free EUrope, and stringers across multiple news organizations.”
Pease,The Media and the Assassination,” p. 300.


Wisner S control of major Media outlets including the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS et cetera, required secrecy and lots of money as these quotes indicate.


Many OSS programs designed for secrecy during WWII were carried over into the post War era through A questionable state department program called the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) run by former OSS Officer Frank Wisner.


Using Marshall Plan Funds, Wisner had all the money he could ever desire as Frances Stonor Saunders describes.


This initial form of aesthetic manipulation garnered unwarranted attention and positive press for forms of Art that were unpopular to the public. Despite the initial attempts to manipulate public opinion,most everyone was still unmotivated by the avant garde Artworks.


The cultural manipulation was ramped up in 1950 when the CIA set up the International Operations Divisions (IOD) under agent Tom Braden. The IOD funded various forms of avant garde Art: music, film, literature and abstract Art (as was later proven by FOIA requests).


Agent Tom Braden confirmed that the IOD acted secretly under his command because of public hostility to funding avant garde Art. He admits this in his own words.


Adding an interesting contentious twist to the battle of cultural manipulation, is the fact that the early CIA was comprised predominantly of Ivy League graduates (largely from Harvard & Yale) many of these graduates were relatively open to communist thought.


Either by design or by accident, the CIA attracted and employed A disproportionate percentage of communist sympathizers. Not surprisingly the CIA quickly established itself as A bastion for some of the most progressive leaning members of government.


Ironically, A program theoretically intended to promote American creativity and combat Soviet cultural credibility was immediately co opted by the very corrosive communist ideology the program was intending to contest!


The cruel irony is illustrated by Former Case Officer Donald Jameson S own words.


Former case officer Donald Jameson explains the financial support from the government to the selected Artists had to be kept secret.


In the 1940 S, the assault on American culture was in its infancy and was resoundingly rebuffed by popular opinion. Unfortunately in 1950 the CIA S cultural siege was reinforced by the Congress for Cultural Freedom (the CCF).”


The CCF was A CIA funded & managed project designed to support: writers, historians, intellectuals, poets, & artists who would be useful in achieving the CIA S manipulative agenda. At it S zenith of power the CCF had offices in 35 nations & controlled over 25 publications.


The CFF also provided an excellent front for the funding and promotion of Abstract Expressionism to appear more organic. The CFF (covertly funded by the CIA) financially sponsored the touring and promotion of expensive multinational Abstract Expressionist expositions.


Further enhancing the illusion of demand and public appreciation, the network of publications controlled by the CFF promoted and praised the Abstract Art movement uniformly.


The State Department S transparent attempt to manipulate American culture in 1947 failed for two primary reasons.

First, there was no appetite for taxpayers to fund A multinational tour of American Art that many believed was A joke or A fraud.


And second, The public appetite could not be falsely created because the publications and “intelligentsia” were not yet thoroughly co opted.

Where the State Department failed in 1947, the CIA was far more successful during the 1950 S.


The CIA avoided public outrage by concealing public funding through front organizations like the CFF. Furthermore, the CIA was able to manufacture public interest & generate positive press through the publications it funded & managed directly & via fronts like the CFF.


From A cultural manipulation perspective the CIA Art tour was A success. It was entirely funded by the public but was designed to appear to be funded by private interests. Likewise all the positive press appeared to be organic but was actually a manufactured echo chamber.


Abstract Expressionism was expensive to transport & display so additional funding & support was provided for by Nelson Rockefeller as well as A few other extremely wealthy people. In addition the CIA & it S wealthy conspirators set up additional shady funding mechanisms.


A good example of the opaque funding provided to abstract expressionism is illustrated by the celebrated multinational exhibition,The New American Painting,”(1958 1959) featuring works by Pollack, De Kooning, Motherwell, and others.


When the show ran out of money and was unable to financially transport from Paris to the Tate Gallery in London, A wealthy man named Julius Fleischmann (connected to MOMA) stepped in to supposedly pay the bill (how philanthropic sounding)! But upon further inspection.


However it was not Fleischmann himself who paid the bill, rather the bill was paid by the Fairfield Foundation, which Fleishmann was the President. Upon closer inspection, the finances were even murkier; it turns out The Fairfield Foundation was actually A CIA slush fund.


So unknown to the public (and perhaps to the Artists and galleries as well) the exhibition was promoted and transported at taxpayer expense through fraudulent foundations acting as slush funds.

Thread Reader, Oct 11th 2019

Meer informatie