There’s a widespread perception that art and creativity is the domain of political leftists. Most people view the left as the intellectual and creative elites, and as a result their ideas are widely consumed by the masses, treated as deeply profound, and seen as a higher plane of consciousness that should be aspired to. In our godless society, the artists have become the new priest class.
Obviously this perception is damaging to opposing positions. The right wing is seen as lacking creativity, lacking intellectual persuasiveness, and lacking social status as a result. There is a reflexive stereotyping of right wingers as being stuck in the past, unwilling or unable to grasp the deeper meanings in life.
If the right is ever to gain social and political influence in our culture, they must cease to be painted in this negative light. They must outperform the left as a generator of refreshing ideas and spiritual profundity. The left wing creative class has grown fat and weak due to their long string of unchallenged primacy, and they are vulnerable to a coup.
When we talk about art in the modern west, we include film, television, music, animation, painting, illustration, sculpting and writing. Looking at sales figures and general popularity, the left has unquestioningly dominated all of these media. Even the productions that are not overtly political have a decidedly liberal subtext.
How did this state of affairs come about? How did the right end up becoming the blacklisted rebel upstarts, fighting against a firmly entrenched establishment to gain a modicum of notoriety? Why is it nearly impossible to eek out a living as a right wing artist?
The causes are complex so let’s first take a look at the most obvious and overbearing aspect of the problem. He who controls the mass media, by extension controls all forms of entertainment and creative arts. This one is pretty simple. Artists become famous and make money by being written up in fawning magazine articles, being promoted in newspapers, and being advertised on radio and television. Their works are showcased in grand municipal galleries. A buzz is created among the chattering classes. Their names fall from the tongues of the coffeehouse crowd, and left outside “the know” are sneered at as hopelessly square and uncouth.
The rootless cosmopolitans who have devoured our mass media industry are the modern day kingmakers, and they control who gets to be cool and who gets to be lame. Their vested interests demand the promotion of creative artists who promote degeneracy, dysfunction, and decay. Their aim is not to enlighten, not to explore truth and beauty, not to reflect mankind’s search for higher meaning. Instead they amplify depression, self-loathing, pessimism, and subversion.
Flipping through radio stations or television programs today is a breathtaking exercise in spiritual debauchery, as the jagged frequencies saturate the soul with perverse despair.
After decades of industry observation, any artist who wishes to “make it” understands that he must promote the same themes of moral nihilism. An artist with right wing beliefs knows that he must be extremely careful to prevent his true self from being discovered, lest he become a financially destitute pariah. Submitting to this creative straitjacket is anathema to any true artist, and most will abandon the pursuit entirely, with the few remaining buried so far underground that it’s nearly impossible to dig them out for public consumption.
As with many aspects of our phony society, it’s a self-reinforcing illusion that creative people are inherently left wing. The giant mirror of mankind is held in enemy hands. This is the result of allowing those who despise us to control everything we see and hear. Their goal is demoralization, followed by destruction. Our media is irrevocably tainted, and our alleged free market system insures that this will never change under the current paradigm.
There are more personal reasons that right wing voices remain unrepresented in the creative realm. The character traits of the typical nationalist are suited to rational pragmatism. The logical practicality of the right wing brain seeks objectivity and definitive value. The right wing artist strives to express timeless, unalterable truths, in easily useful forms. A child gazing upon a painting by a right wing artist does not need it explained to him. He can appreciate the beauty and meaning instinctively. Right wingers pursue technical expertise to employ in the pursuit of spiritual beauty.
Where the right wing thinker is bound by logical rule sets, by contrast the progressive is untethered by such restrictions. The left wing artist relies on subjectivity, interpretation, and contextual diffusion. He hides under a subterfuge of fanciful sophistry. Creating leftist artwork requires no discipline, no long years of practice, no standard objective measures of merit, no technical skill. It is explained that if you don’t understand the meaning of a leftist’s abstract forms, you lack the intellectual depth to grasp it and you should read magazine articles penned by enlightened thinkers to help bring you up to speed. It’s a racket!
Those with right wing and nationalist orientations are more concerned with being practical than being enigmatic. When faced with the enormously unfavorable odds of success in the creative world of phantoms and fairytales, the right winger is more likely to express himself with fine craftsmanship in usable forms. Examples include architecture, woodworking, weapon making and engineering.
The great overarching project of the 20th century was one of cultural disintegration. Long-standing standards of achievement and beauty were ruthlessly deconstructed by the same gang of professional critics who commandeered our mass media. The swarm of communist rats were fleeing the sinking ships of the East after gnawing through their floorboards. Most of them landed on the naively welcoming shores of England and the United States.
Imbued with a stringent tribal identity, coupled with a fanatical desire to tear down European society and replace it with a self-beneficial kleptocracy, these cunning foreigners proved too powerful for the open, credulous, individualistic societies which granted them such hospitality. As the decades wore on, the crude fingerprints of nepotistic subversion began to show on every cultural artifact held up to the light.
The entire concept of art and creativity underwent a dramatic conversion during this era, at the surgical hands of these clannish aliens who appointed themselves the enemies of truth and beauty. Ugly pessimism, cynicism and nihilism crept into the public psyche and our national mood was transformed from a celebration of innovative spirit to a culture of critique.
In a radical departure, the era of Romanticism, Realism, Naturalism, Regionalism, and Classicism, was supplanted by “Modern Art“. Perhaps no painter is so emblematic of this paradigm shift as Pablo Picasso, who in this writer’s opinion was an overrated hack, a charlatan who’s primary talent was his shrewdness. His contemporaries like Jackson Pollock, Marcel Duchamp, Mark Rothko, Max Ernst, and Rene Magritte solidified the deconstructionist movement.
As we entered the sixties and seventies, this utter rejection of traditional beauty became far more pronounced, with artists such as Jean-Michael Basquiat, Andy Warhol, Marina Abramovic, and Salvador Dali. Along with the twisted forms of modern painters, the creative landscape as a whole became much more overtly political, with dominant themes of Bolshevism and anti-Americanism. The standard Christian themes so prevalent in earlier works was completely eliminated as the industry became dominated by Jewish promoters and their carefully selected proteges.
The postmodern age was born, with Wikipedia offering this description of the term:
“While encompassing a wide variety of approaches, postmodernism is generally defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony, or rejection toward the meta-narratives and ideologies of modernism, often calling into question various assumptions of Enlightenment rationality. Consequently, common targets of postmodern critique include universalist notions of objective reality, morality, truth, human nature, reason, language, and social progress. Postmodern thinkers frequently call attention to the contingent or socially-conditioned nature of knowledge claims and value systems, situating them as products of particular political, historical, or cultural discourses and hierarchies. Accordingly, postmodern thought is broadly characterized by tendencies to self-referentiality, epistemological and moral relativism, pluralism, and irreverence.”
Sounds wonderful, doesn’t it? If you’re wondering where our national pride and innocence went, there’s your answer. If one was attempting to subvert a population and destroy their confidence, these are the perfect psychological weapons for the job.
Pop Art also came into fashion during this period, represented by figures such as Roy Lichtenstein, Kieth Haring, and Patrick Nagel. Pop Art could best be described as colorful pictures stripped of all deeper meaning…suitable for the walls of a nursery if not for the sexual undertones.
The 1980s and 90s pretty well finished off whatever was left of classical art, ushering in the age of performance art, political art, and sheer spectacle. During this period, artists such as Robert Mapplethorpe, Andres Serrano, Jeff Koons, Damien Hirst, and Banksy dominated the scene. Juxtapoz Magazine became the standard-bearer of the contemporary painters, with Robert Williams’ famous Appetite for Destruction cover art penetrating the fickle public consciousness.
From the early 2000s onward, it’s difficult to name any definitive painters commanding wide influence, as the cultural focus shifted to the world of digital creation. The most popular contemporary painters are largely mired in post-modernist garbage, struggling to replicate an era that is better shoved into the historical incinerator.
This article has focused mainly on painters, because they are typically held as the vanguard of all art movements and their work serves as a touchstone for each era. The mediums of film, television, music, and literature have tracked with the general themes and sentiments found in the work of painters.
In summary, to answer the question of why most famous artists are leftists: popularity and fame are carefully controlled by the cultural gatekeepers, who in turn are controlled by the financial elite. The collective mission of these hostile foreigners has long been to undermine American and European societies by sabotaging the youthful confidence and optimistic outlook of these nations. Artists who toe the line and contribute to the cynicism, despair, and moral relativism found across our culture are rewarded with money and fame, while those who do not are ignored and de-platformed. All of the artists appear to be leftists because those are the only ones you are allowed to see!
But every action has a reaction, and every pendulum swings both ways. The time is here for a right wing creative renaissance. The right’s ordained role as establishment boogeymen and enemies of the bourgeoisie will only aid in the task of retaking popular culture and capturing the imaginations of Generation Z. After all, every new generation wants to define themselves by casting off illegitimate social norms of the past. In the age of decadence and debauchery, embracing truth and beauty is a dangerous act of rebellion. Traditionalism is sexy again!