You might check that, some of "you all" just might just damn well surprise you, regardless of your circles vs ours.
PortaJohn
- Thread starter Lowlight
- Start date
-
- Tags
It does make you a Commie or Commie sympathizer. JMO. I love my AK's as works of art but dont have pics displayed of them or Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov.
If you think it is, sure. I don't care.
It is pretty indisputable that Warhol is one of the five or six most important post war artists. His work almost exclusively dealt with popular culture, and was not, necessarily, approving of its subjects. To assume a Warhol Mao is a shrine to Mao is like to assume having his Brillo Pads is a shrine to cleaning. The Mao pieces were commentary on the frightfulness of the large murals of communists all over China from when Nixon visited in 72. They were commentary on propaganda.
You all doesn't mean each and every one of you, it means you guys. It's not an insult.
Biden withdraws Trump's restoration of UN sanctions on Iran - Breitbart
The Biden administration is withdrawing former president Donald Trump’s restoration of U.N. sanctions on Iran Biden withdraws Trump's restoration of
www.breitbart.com
Then we should tear down all of Warhol work and /or put them all in a place to be viewed in the proper context. Just like they are doing with all the statues across the country so we do not offend/trigger somebody by having out in public view.
To the Left, just the image of the American Flag is some subtle dog whistle right-wing insurrection indicator but displaying a murderous communist dictator prominently at your home for the world to see is just “art”? Nowhere but in the mind of a liberal mental pretzel can that make sense.
So we should be retards like liberals are, because liberals are?
Look a lot of art can be uncomfortable or impenetrable, but ironically Warhol was on the very pro-American spectrum of artists, both of his time and certainly as compared to artists today. Was he a conservative? No. But he had many conservative leanings, was devoutly religious, and was unabashedly pro American. Also, ironically, some other artists of the time, who painted American flags and maps, were making negative commentary on the US as an idea, and were dedicated communists.
Jasper Johns was the only pop artist who rivaled Warhol in importance. This is one of his most famous pieces. He was a communist, and this was painted as commentary about the ills of the anti-communist movement in the US in the 50s and 60s. Ask yourself if, knowing the context, it is a better Zoom background.
it is all deflection.
conservative white christians are being painted as the elite establishment, but conservative white christians control nothing.
who controls the banks? not conservative white christians.
who controls mass media? not conservative white christians.
who controls social media? not conservative white christians.
who controls news media? not conservative white christians.
who controls hollywood? not conservative white christians.
who are the richest people in the world? not conservative white christians.
I think the two missing states should be most offended
Last edited:
Yes but an educated person in power doesn’t accidentally stumble into a Mao painting or Che shirt. A person spending thousands on Warhol cannot be ignorant to the political background of Mao. I’ll give a pass to a dumb 18yr old with a Che t-shirt. It’s much easier to accidentally buy something with a Confederate flag on it but no one in power would get a pass on that based on ignorance.
The political background of Mao isn't the issue. I take great offense at idiots wearing Mao shirts, or having Mao posters or little red books. The point is that the art has a meaning distinct from the subject. It isn't like being a kid and having a poster of your favorite baseball player. Likewise, having a renaissance painting with Judas in it doesn't mean that you support killing Christ.
Guessing this is okay than......
Got a copy hanging in your house?
Soy Boy, preacher who cares tyrants all of the same feather.
She was a horrible candidate.
I can’t continue with this retardation. This guy/girl/it/transperson/whatever mentally masturbates a devil’s advocate role to every nuance. I don’t care if Mother Teresa and Ghandi naked finger painted Hitler rescuing orphaned puppies, a CEO or congressman cannot have that on their wall.
I dont know....
I think im gonna allow that just this once.
I don't have a painting of Mao or Hitler in my house. But if you can't see a difference between a painting lionizing somebody and a painting criticizing a movement, then I can't help you out. That is why I posted the American Flag painting. It was an intentional work of pro-communist commentary, while the Mao works were intentional comments about cult of personality.
Being conservative does not require you to be ignorant about culture. I don't know why somebody would want to be.
Last edited:
So when I walked into the Otto Muehl exhibition in Austria and the first words out of my conservative mouth was, "Oh this is some fucked up shit right here" ....guessing I'm done
Really. I thought we were only supposed to be ignorant about our own culture, and ignorant of what the left is really up to.
Look you are doing a great job really, but the entire lot of them are out of the closet, full blown, unapologetic socialists now. Every one of them admit it.
You don't have to defend them...it really looks pathetic.
F! I'd have an "Electric Chair" painting, as long as it was "colorfull", above my fire place(if I had one) and I wouldn't gaf who painted it, because, I'm in favor of the "Death Penalty" and I think there"re neat. Mac
No, I think it is fine to have any reaction you want to art. What I am arguing is lame is to steadfastly believe that a piece of art can have no intention or meaning other than that it is a picture of something, and holding on to that because it affirms some political point you want to hold.
Here. They run about $12 million for originals, about a quarter of the price of a Mao.
sure it "can", but most people tend to display things they like or admire.
i'm sure you are one of those that also defend abortion on demand because 0.001% are done to save the mother.
Not art I dont give a shit.....50 million maybe more dead from that prick.
My town public schools instituted "Tools of the Mind". Lev Vygotsky is the psychologist that came up with that program. Google it.
If we are going to consider Mao art and Lev Vygotsky's education system legitimate why aren't our medical people using the medical research of Doctors Mengele and Hirt?
You fool, those people with those paintings would go and say the exact same things you are saying, but turning around and attacking others for their history/art/monuments that they didn't like. You pretend to know so much, yet so naive. You're constantly defending everything these people do, for some fucking odd reason, while completely ignoring their hypocrisy. Go ahead and hold your head high with all your reasoning while the other side laughs at you and only believes those reasons apply to them. Clueless idiots on the right like you are part of the problem.
but you think it is fine to put a picture of a murderous communist pedophile above your mantle? (could be shopped anyway...)
oh wayt, a preference for 13-14 year old virgins doesn't make mao a pedo right, and long as they had their first period?
i don't make any distinction, but is there a name for what mao was?
Did Mao paint that painting? No. It isn't a Mao painting. It is a painting of a mural of Mao done by Warhol.
I am not defending anything "these people do." I am absolutely aghast at the tearing down of statues/monuments/etc. I grew up in the art world, most of my long term clients are major art collectors etc, so I guess I am "one of those people," but I can also tell you that, in my experience, it is not those people who want to tear down statutes. They have other thoughts I disagree with, but it is generally academics, politicians and crazy young activists that want to do the destroying.
Not all culture is worth the attention or time to understand it. Most of it is vapid, shallow, and self serving.
So Mapplethorpe's "Piss Christ" is art but a Charlie Hebdo cartoon is offense worthy of jihad?
Fuck the FBI will follow jihadists all the way to the scene of a "Draw Mohammad" event where they intend to commit murder without acting on the shooters and watch as some rent a guard bravely gets in a gunfight with them. Walk through the velvet ropes of Congress uninvited though they will use all resources to hunt you down.
Burn an American flag = freedom of speech.
Burn a BLM banner = hate crime.
I support your posting your bullshit and I hope you agree with my right to tell you to satiate your hunger from the tree of dicks.
Who is Harold Ford Jr. dipshit? The guy with the Mao painting you're defending?
Culture is everything.
Race means nothing.
One is literally skin deep.
The other determines values.
Not all cultures have value and deserve respect or survival.
Jesus. Mapplethorpe didn't do Piss Christ. It was Andres Serrano. It is not a piece I like, but it is certainly art. Charlie Hebdo is a bunch of communists, but I have no problem with their cartoons. I think they consider them satire, not art, so I will go with that.
I think you should be able to burn both flag and banner, as long as it is yours, which was the problem in the BLM case you are talking about. The banner wasn't the property of the burner. I detest BLM, and detest burning the American flag.
Thank you for your support. I will reciprocate in telling you that I support your right to be factually wrong on just about everything, but still to see yourself as enlightened.
So, the funny thing about that picture is that the Mao piece is clearly a worthless print next to a bunch of chintzy shit on his wall. I believe that he isn't trying to be a commie, he is trying to look like somebody more important than he is.
He hasn't been an active politician for years.
I bet you haven't sucked a cock in a while too, but you're still a cock sucker
I agree with the second part, not the first. I think it is worth understanding as much as you can, especially when you are talking about the dominant culture in your area. To do otherwise is not very strategic.
No, no, no, That chair is empty, needs someone in it. Got to have the full meaning presented and portrayed, In other words, effect. Mac
perhaps there is something to this, but i don't need to examine dog shit closely to smell it and know to avoid it.
You know your degenerates better than I do......give yourself a star.
Never saw anyone charged for theft when removing an American flag and burning it.....FBI sure made it known you would be though when taking a BLM banner and the charge was a hate crime.
I guess I am "Fake but Accurate" thats an acceptable effort in your circles.
That's fine, but this episode kind of elucidates my point. Take the two Maos. The one on a shirt and the one in a painting. Which is more dangerous to our culture? The one on the shirt because it is a celebration of Mao, and the correlation between leftist bullshit and wearing those shirts is high. On the other hand, the correlation between being a communist and owning a Mao Warhol is very low. Knowing our dominant culture, whether worthy or not, allows you to understand that. Maybe that isn't important to you, it isn't worthless to me.
sure, i understand your point about warhol, which i think at this point is the epitome of "cultural posing" or pretending you have a refined taste for art, when it is really tired and outdated.
but beyond that, why choose that particular piece? to be edgy?
