Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts
Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
Who determines what people/entities are "intellectuals"? An "artist" who covers Jesus in ants or elephant s.hit is not an intellectual. Now if this "artist" created something that got his/her point across (if they were anti-relgion, pro-religion, etc) without offending people so gratuitously then I would say that they were an "intellectual".
Just because someone goes through great efforts to be different or show their dissenting opinion does not automatically qualify them as "intellectual". But, I will support their RIGHT to do so.
IMO the art display makes gays look nuts. I hope gays know straights think it is a bad portrayal of them. It seems to be something a gay hater would put up so it does make you wonder and I guess that is good since art is suppose to do that. It does nothing to bring sympathy to the gay cause.
I'm not atheist. I'm catholic in defense of religion when they are actually practicing said religion. When they act like tyrants wearing a God cloak, I've got a huge problem with them. Walk your talk andrea. Your Lord is watching you, unless you prefer to worship political men above your maker. Then you are no longer Christian, but something other than Christian. Then you are no longer American, but something other than American. It's a free country, and you are free to be what you truly are. You just might not like what people call you when they judge you by your deeds.
My deeds are clean for the most part but when I screw up, I ask forgiveness. My God is a loving God and He forgives me as He forgives everyone else. And it's funny that you say you're Catholic but yet you did not capitalize the C. Unless you're referring to the all-encompassing catholic church, although I doubt that's the case. Many of the people who call themselves Catholic are non-practicing and have no idea what God wants or what the Bible says, so saying you're Catholic doesn't really mean much.
Referring to a church as a urinal is outrageous and that's what I was calling out. I have no idea where you got the bit about worshiping a politician, so I have no response to that.
My deeds are clean for the most part but when I screw up, I ask forgiveness. My God is a loving God and He forgives me as He forgives everyone else. And it's funny that you say you're Catholic but yet you did not capitalize the C. Unless you're referring to the all-encompassing catholic church, although I doubt that's the case. Many of the people who call themselves Catholic are non-practicing and have no idea what God wants or what the Bible says, so saying you're Catholic doesn't really mean much.
Wow you got all that from a typo.
Did God instruct you to chase others around demanding they comply with God's will? Are you instructed to impose self discipline through free will and accept God's judgment of all?
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821
Referring to a church as a urinal is outrageous and that's what I was calling out. I have no idea where you got the bit about worshiping a politician, so I have no response to that.
Referring to the behavior of humans abusing religion trying to own God, and the abuses TO the church itself BY them, are the issue.
Worshiping politicians- you'd be able to pay attention better if you had more self discipline. It's a vicious spiral. Don't take my word for it, go to your bible.
IMO the art display makes gays look nuts. I hope gays know straights think it is a bad portrayal of them. It seems to be something a gay hater would put up so it does make you wonder and I guess that is good since art is suppose to do that. It does nothing to bring sympathy to the gay cause.
By your rational, any member of a select group can make everyone else in that group look ridiculous.
Does every American think Texans are idiots because of a particular President from there? No.
Most Americans aren't so stupid as to think that, except probably near where you live.
What's your problem with gays anyway? They are generally wealthy, take care of their neighborhoods, and pay for services they never use. Go to any gay neighborhood in any city and it's probably one of the wealthiest and cleanest.
Who determines what people/entities are "intellectuals"? An "artist" who covers Jesus in ants or elephant s.hit is not an intellectual.""
No, but he's still an artist living in an ALLEGEDLY free country....RIGHT?!
"" Now if this "artist" created something that got his/her point across (if they were anti-relgion, pro-religion, etc) without offending people so gratuitously then I would say that they were an "intellectual".
Just because someone goes through great efforts to be different or show their dissenting opinion does not automatically qualify them as "intellectual". But, I will support their RIGHT to do so.
Ya , WHO determines what people are intellectuals?...NOT YOU, FOR SURE. That's why they must not be suppressed...No ONE person nor group of people should determine who is an intellectual OR an artist and who isn't.
From Dr. Britt's 14 Points of Fascism:
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts
Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
Ya , WHO determines what people are intellectuals?...NOT YOU, FOR SURE. That's why they must not be suppressed...No ONE person nor group of people should determine who is an intellectual OR an artist and who isn't.
From Dr. Britt's 14 Points of Fascism:
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts
Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
Fascism is very bad indeed. But, what is happening in this country, and what I fear the vast majority of people are missing is that it may be seeping into our system quietly.
Please read the two links above. The first one describes how Germany's Fascist Government used the arts as a tool for the state to "manufacture consent," as it were (a term used by Chomsky, I believe.) The Arts under German Fascism were promoted by the National Chamber of Culture, which would be the equivelent of our National Endowment of the Arts. The NCC promoted a set of values esteemed by the nation.
The second link, entitled "The National Endowment for the Art of Persuasion" written by an artist, btw tells of our current administrations' call to enlist the aid of the National Endowment for the Arts to direct "the art community toward creating art on the very issues that are currently under contentious national debate; those being health care reform and cap-an-trade legislation." (And while the article does not directly address a pro-homosexual/anti-Christianity agenda via the arts, it would not surprise me when you consider that the Obama appointed, Safe School Czar, Kevin Jennings wrote the forward to the book, "Que*ring Elementary Education," which addresses the issue of using art, music and literature to "educate" school children about homosexuality when the curriculum does not allow direct teaching of it.)
I, personally, believe that the Federal Government is overreaching its boundaries and that the use of taxpayer dollars to support artwork with an agenda, whether its cap and trade or anti-Christianity is wrong. It reminds me too much of Fascism. I am NOT opposed to privately funded controversial artwork. I am very much for free speech. I have even dabbled in the arts, myself and am supportive of the arts. But I do not like the mix of government and the arts. It reminds me too much of Hitler's Germany.
Please, please, please take the time to read these two links. Constructive feedback is welcome.
Any chance they are replacing it with an "Ant-Covered Mohammad"?
I was going to say this. If they displayed an ant-covered Mohammad that would spark FAR more protest than this did/would, and it wouldn't be politically correct.
Who determines what people/entities are "intellectuals"? An "artist" who covers Jesus in ants or elephant s.hit is not an intellectual. Now if this "artist" created something that got his/her point across (if they were anti-relgion, pro-religion, etc) without offending people so gratuitously then I would say that they were an "intellectual".
Just because someone goes through great efforts to be different or show their dissenting opinion does not automatically qualify them as "intellectual". But, I will support their RIGHT to do so.
I don't believe the artist intended to denounce the teachings of Jesus, but meant to express in his view what is happening to the teachings of Jesus. What is being done in his name. I understand that no one who saw the exhibit registered a complaint. It came from afar, likely based on hearsay.
People are primed to be offended by fundamentalists. It's all too easy for people to fall into the idea their religion is being attacked from outsiders when they've been so thoroughly conditioned to be obedient to the words of men representing authority in lieu of God's word. Loyalties get muddy, 'for me or against me', then by Papal Bull obedient priests incite Catholics to murder Protestants and Cathars. Loyalties get muddy, children are victimized. How dare they question God's will, don't be disloyal to God. There's nothing about Christian religions or the conduct of any given church that should have any cause to fear the light of day. Not One Thing. If they're doing something that would be embarrassing then they are failing to practice the faith. If you believe there's something to fear about daylight, I'd like to know your reasons why.
Elephant dung- I didn't care for it and I also didn't see the point of drawing so much attention to what was an insignificant work. Go through a typical artists studio, there are volumes that never make the grade. The context of artist material-- prior to modern chemistry artists derived their pallet from nature; stone, insects, plant material, earth. African culture dung is a valued symbol of fertility, not an offensive material to primitive cultures. He was a student of cave paintings and the dung has been used in other works as well. Untitled Document (http://tiger.towson.edu/~mhagan3/critique.html - broken link) People took it the way they decided to take it- reactionary. If he had reached into an American septic tank for sludge and/ or toxic material as an artistic statement, they'd have a basis for offensive grievance. He did not, I'm not personally offended, and I still don't care for his work.
If it makes you feel any better, here's a response to his work by another artist... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...hris_Ofili.jpg
So, on the whole of things, even if these artistic expressions do register complaints with one another, would you rather they remain artistic expressions, or would you rather see natives revolt against missionaries, China imprison clergy as political punishment, or activists getting aggressive on Papal itineraries? The Pope is claiming himself victim of public outcry, but the Vatican has stonewalled people with grievances for years. Even law enforcement officials complained publicly. Would you prefer people air their grievances through reasoned statements, due process of law, and artistic presentations, or would you prefer they make their displeasure known by driving an airplane into the Vatican?
As we speak there are women in Afghanistan fraught with despair over their religion, culture and their government that they're setting themselves on fire to flee this earth. I'd rather they have options. I'd rather we uphold our options.
I was going to say this. If they displayed an ant-covered Mohammad that would spark FAR more protest than this did/would, and it wouldn't be politically correct.
If it were Mohammed covered in ants, it appears there are too many Muslims too weak in their faith to endure the slightest criticism. Artists have been murdered for depicting Islam in a less than flattering light. Are we better than that, or are we going to follow Islam's lead?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unless you're referring to the all-encompassing catholic church, although I doubt that's the case. Many of the people who call themselves Catholic are non-practicing and have no idea what God wants or what the Bible says, so saying you're Catholic doesn't really mean much.
