/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6569195
> yes. you don't have to be an anti-semite or a conspiracy theorist to know and acknowledge that abstract expressionism was literally a jewish CIA psyop from day one.
Literally wasn’t lol. Art has always served the same purpose of being a way for rich people to hold and move money in appreciating assets. The only thing that changed from 1800 to 1900 was the invention and propagation of camera technology. This caused the oligarch’s interest to shift from realistic art of themselves to be preserved for posterity to “conversation piece” art that appreciated in value for being weird or ambiguous and gaining word-of-mouth buzz among art circles.

The reason people like Pollock became popular, long before the CIA started promoting him abroad to fuck to fuck with commies, was that they were creating a novel product on a large canvas for rich people to stand around sounding smart about.

The overwhelming consumer demand, and supply, of modern/subversive art has essentially always been driven by rich white anti-Catholic waspy types looking to put money in appreciating assets that can cross borders untaxed. This is a tradition going back beyond Christianity entirely into Ancient Greece lol. Das Juden have never actually had any level of involvement in art brokering beyond the amount that allows them to be used as scapegoats by the people making all the money. It’s all a pretty standard outgroup bad chimp behaviorism meme