German blogger DerWaidler had an article the day before yesterday in which he rightfully criticised the dependency of German artists on the state. The Kulturstiftung des Bundes (Culture Foundation of the Federal Government) is exclusively subsidizing projects that serve the left-wing ideology. If you have thought that theaters, movie makers, painters, writers and musicians are a mix, maybe even a zoo, of left-wing pet groups already, think again. There is always more to ask for and the goal is now not only to make all the stars gay, female and/or from a non-white ethnic background, but also the managers, studio bosses, and other leaders of the industry. This happens despite the fact that the old guard is already ideologically doused with all the right opinions.
You probably know already that the rhetoric that comes out of the artsy corners are beyond what journalists even say. The colonial history, for example, is only presented as something negative and the role countries like Germany played is exaggerated while highly involved countries like the Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) are mysteriously absent from the discourse. Demands that Germans have somehow to repay something to Muslims for some colonial guilt are a bit bold, too bold for most journalists, but they are not unusual in the sphere of the arts.
I once planned to write about the various controls and monetary subsidies that subdue journalism under the state. The network is too big to even try. You have the same picture when it comes to the arts business. No gallery, no stage, no TV channel, no radio broadcaster, no nothing that could popularize different ideas through art than the prevailing leftism.
Now, there is a little rebellion. The project Kontakt 18 is about 100 authors for scripts (TV shows and movies, cinema) who have signed a plea to not accept any offers until some rights to their script and its materialization in the end product can be retained. The approach is very labor-union-like and this is why we hear from it. Despite the fact that probably every and each of them is fully indoctrinated, they have no chance. On the top of the food chain, leftists with the same indoctrination will not relinquish their hold on power. They decide to the t total what is being said in the public space.
Recently, the Deutsche Kulturrat (German Culture Council) has suggested to scrap all talk shows completely at least for a year. The shows are already highly orchestrated, but even the few minutes conservatives can use to wedge in their opinions is too much. Because making all these beloved shows disappear at once would look too totalitarian, Mr Zimmermann, the head of the Council, declared his suggestion as his private opinion. Strange enough, Mr Zimmermann seems to be the only representative of this “council” that makes it into the daylight and seems to have monarchical powers. His organisation is the biggest lobby group for the culture industry in Germany, supervising 246 smaller lobby groups (this absurd concept is called a Dachverband in Germany and follows the Marxist idea of a soviet republic).
But, of course, the state cannot only control media and family friendly art. Berlin is now also considering to subsidize feminist pornography. I’m not a prude who abhors pornography, but without further research I know already that I abhor this. While we are at it…I mean, IT…isn’t the entire culture industry perverse? And isn’t it already replete with women and submissive men? Chances are that you make it because you signal submissiveness to the money, contact and limelight providing powers.
When the Harvey Weinstein scandal broke, it became clear (see video) that already children are groomed and raped by Hollywood perverts. I do not only believe that this is true for Hollywood, but for all arts and across Western nations. Isn’t it strange that so many of the actors, singers, painters and so on look like they are into anal sex? Whenever I try to veer into this direction, I should include a kowtow. I mean a sexual practice (only anal sex), not an orientation. Of course, we cannot know, but it is suspicious that straight men, who have a harder time to entertain the sheer thought of this practice, are so underrepresented.
This may have a natural cause because women and gays seem to be more interested in the arts in the first place, but an independent factor might be that arts usually don’t make money. They make people highly dependent and you have to serve something more if you want to be lifted up in the game. So the ideal of an artist is a meek, submissive character and to enforce this trait it is entirely possible that submitting him or her sexually is a part of it. The spiral might reenforce itself because emasculated men will be seen as an example for meek teenagers to follow their paths into arts. What it reflects is a culture of fierce authoritarianism and submission.
And while this #MeToo hype may look like a counter-movement that could remove the sexual subjugation from the sphere of arts, I believe that it is only targeted at specific individuals and not the practice. After all, the leftist pet group zoo must take control. The latest #MeToo victim is Pixar’s John Lasseter. He is accused of hugging too long.
Some of the leftist industry leaders must have realised that submissive art which only speaks to women does not do well on the box office. There is some pointless violence in shows about ancient Rome and the Vikings that is clearly not directed at a female audience. The Marvel movies are not made for an effeminate populace, either. There is a niche in Hollywood for heterosexual men who are not soft. The goal is, of course, to fiddle left-wing messages into these pieces of art. As we see in the Muslim world, masculine traits don’t always come as a component of a well-rounded ideal of manliness. These artists may be just submissive enough to turn their aggression against political opponents and people of a lower social status.
P.S. I find this recent violence porn wave pernicious. It talks to masculine men, presents the graphics men long for, but removes all moral justification for them. The scene on top seems to enforce some tribal honor system. The star only engages after his group (“13”?) is offended (which is the moral logic of the political correctness mob). Neither does it show men fighting for a higher goal nor does it encourage men to test themseleves against other men in a fair competition. The unbalanced set up is also typical for Hollywood. One man or one woman fights off entire legions. Without this propaganda most self-defence courses would not exist. We have completely lost our senses about the nature of violence and how we can control it. And I assume a realistic view will only return when adults measure their physical capabilities again in some brawl-like games (e.g. martial arts, formal and informal).