The barrier to better economic understanding of these issues is reinforced by a kind of propaganda that many seem attached to because it feels good. The appeal of coercing money from “undeserving” people or entities and giving it to “deserving” people or entities seems almost timeless; that it’s paired with an identity that has a stronghold on “compassion” is irresistible. I don’t have much hope that many people (artist or otherwise) will pick up Hazlitt and seek a better understanding. Instead, the reality will force many to take their medicine, and while they swallow it, continue to lament over the inequity of it all.
I’m sympathetic to the argument. I think the next best thing is to make the federal arts agency into a new patronage system for “dissenting” artists and academics, by which I mean those looking to simply make excellent art or research that is not subjugated towards political ends (think the UN’s Art Charter for Climate Change, the DEI-ification of the art world, etc). The NEA and NEH still have important imprimaturs that they can bestow upon artists or academics who have been silently—or loudly—cancelled for refusing to play the political game. However, the one thing all the federal cultural agencies need to do is make a clean break from all national arts associations, including Americans for the Arts, American Alliance of Museums, League of American Orchestras, Dance/USA, and so on, by ceasing all funding, if not actively working against them. I should have a piece out in the next few days discussing how federal funding helped AAM embed DEI at museums.
It has finally dawned on the Republicans that it would be easier to shutter these agencies than depoliticize them. Vivek's call a couple of weeks ago for "Milei-style cuts, on steroids" sets the right tone. Whether they can accomplish them is another question.
The problem with trying to re-orient the agencies to reward the dissidents is that they're full of partisans who already think that they're on the side of the #resistance. (I'm open to the possibility that the NEA and NEH are relatively neutral and the malign influence comes from Ford, Mellon, Creative Capital, and so on, but from where we plebs stand it looks like a singular complex of postliberal progressivism.) Even if you flushed out the lackeys, you wouldn't solve the moral problem of robbing the taxpayer to fund art they haven't asked for, and then there's nothing stopping a repeat of history when the White House comes under Democrat control. You're correct that the imprimatur of the agencies are incomparable and it would be sad to lose them, but I agree with Vivek and Elon that the bureaucracy of which they're a part is an existential threat to the republic. At least we'll finally free ourselves from NPR.
When your piece comes out, please reply to this post with a link to it. I'm looking forward.
I haven't, and it would surprise me. Some of their funding is private and they have trusts built up. In any case, the Smithsonian museums are responsible for the infamous "white values" graphic and much equally bad programming. People who want this should pay for it.
The barrier to better economic understanding of these issues is reinforced by a kind of propaganda that many seem attached to because it feels good. The appeal of coercing money from “undeserving” people or entities and giving it to “deserving” people or entities seems almost timeless; that it’s paired with an identity that has a stronghold on “compassion” is irresistible. I don’t have much hope that many people (artist or otherwise) will pick up Hazlitt and seek a better understanding. Instead, the reality will force many to take their medicine, and while they swallow it, continue to lament over the inequity of it all.
I’m sympathetic to the argument. I think the next best thing is to make the federal arts agency into a new patronage system for “dissenting” artists and academics, by which I mean those looking to simply make excellent art or research that is not subjugated towards political ends (think the UN’s Art Charter for Climate Change, the DEI-ification of the art world, etc). The NEA and NEH still have important imprimaturs that they can bestow upon artists or academics who have been silently—or loudly—cancelled for refusing to play the political game. However, the one thing all the federal cultural agencies need to do is make a clean break from all national arts associations, including Americans for the Arts, American Alliance of Museums, League of American Orchestras, Dance/USA, and so on, by ceasing all funding, if not actively working against them. I should have a piece out in the next few days discussing how federal funding helped AAM embed DEI at museums.
It has finally dawned on the Republicans that it would be easier to shutter these agencies than depoliticize them. Vivek's call a couple of weeks ago for "Milei-style cuts, on steroids" sets the right tone. Whether they can accomplish them is another question.
The problem with trying to re-orient the agencies to reward the dissidents is that they're full of partisans who already think that they're on the side of the #resistance. (I'm open to the possibility that the NEA and NEH are relatively neutral and the malign influence comes from Ford, Mellon, Creative Capital, and so on, but from where we plebs stand it looks like a singular complex of postliberal progressivism.) Even if you flushed out the lackeys, you wouldn't solve the moral problem of robbing the taxpayer to fund art they haven't asked for, and then there's nothing stopping a repeat of history when the White House comes under Democrat control. You're correct that the imprimatur of the agencies are incomparable and it would be sad to lose them, but I agree with Vivek and Elon that the bureaucracy of which they're a part is an existential threat to the republic. At least we'll finally free ourselves from NPR.
When your piece comes out, please reply to this post with a link to it. I'm looking forward.
Have you heard that all Smithsonian Museums will be permanently closed?
I haven't, and it would surprise me. Some of their funding is private and they have trusts built up. In any case, the Smithsonian museums are responsible for the infamous "white values" graphic and much equally bad programming. People who want this should pay for it.
https://www.newsweek.com/smithsonian-race-guidelines-rational-thinking-hard-work-are-white-values-1518333