I just spent eight minutes trying to figure this out and it was the greatest eight minutes of the entire day. Well, apart from watching the video obviously.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me. -Martin Niemöller
@@littlestone1541 no, it's not relevant it's a literal relic. There hasn't been death camps in the west for almost a century. You are brainwashed and paranoid
A similar thing happened to the early Italian Futurists, especially the architects. In fact, the first Fascist party headquarters of Italy was drawn by prominent futurist architects. But while Mussolini humored them at first, when the fascists started guiding art and architecture, the Futurists were considered too radical so they started building neoclassical buildings instead.
@@topdeot I am not familiar with Malevich in particular but it wouldn't surprise me. The Soviet avant-garde movement flourished somewhat under the early Soviet regime, but I know the same repression of artistic movements happened especially during Stalin's rule, and particularly with architects. Early Soviet art movements were really interesting, with art influenced by modernist movements like cubism. Early architectural movements in the Soviet Union embraced really radical styles like constructivism, brutalism and structuralism, to name a few, during the 20's and early 30's. But as it seems all authoritarian regimes do, Stalin realized that art could be used as propaganda to push the state agenda. So as they focused on their system of agitprop, all art and architecture were now to be designed to show the power and majesty of the Soviet state through Socialist Realism, it was like the space race but for architecture. I mean just look at the Palace of the Soviets that they never ended up building, talk about traditionalism/classicism taken to the extreme. Stalinist architecture basically went against what every modernist Soviet art movement tried to accomplish.
i remember when i learned about futurism one year ago that it really impressed me. the concept of the future, velocity, light... until this year when i heard a phrase from the futurism manifest, i believe, by marinetti that went along with "burning museums and libraries" or something like that. that's when it started getting suspicious to me as it reminded me of nazi actions. and then i heard my teachers relating it to fascism and i went "well, that makes more sense". quite disapointed in myself that i didn't figure this out sooner 🤦♀️
A common trope with fascism and state-socialism is an ideology that postures about skyrocketing their tribe into the future, but then either makes a 180 turn to the past, or stagnates to one point in time. North Korea, and for a time, South Korea were pretty much stuck in the 1950s.
@@deadcaliph6414 I think this is because Modernism (as in the cultural movement of the 20th century, not 'what is current') had this idea of leaving history, which was unscientific and backwards, for a future utilitarian perfect design. It assumed that there was a correct way of doing things by a logical design, which would be universally applicable. Liberal capitalism was also a Modernist ideology, but eventually adapted to post-modernism, and became more flexible (not that I endorse its hegemony tho). Excessive state-control also strengthens stagnation at some point because it has to funnel information from bottom to top where the decisions are made. In the process it has to simplify and abstract the information because there's less direct access to the information on the ground. Thus this has the same effect as the idea of universally applicable engineering. There is a difference in this between the state-socialists and the fascists. Despite its glamorization of an industrial war machine, fascism always had a pre-occupation with (a mythologized version of) history. It claims that a once great nation or race has fallen into 'degeneracy' and needs to be reborn in a new form. So it harkens back to history and traditional values, but with the tools and engineering of the current era. State-socialism on the other hand has never had this relationship to history and bringing it back, as Marx believed in the progress of history through stages. At least, that's my not-that-educated analysis of how it happened.
@@voomvoom4522 This is what doesn't get through people's heads. They mock the "horseshoe theory" and present no proof that it is wrong. Authoritarians are evil no matter who they are.
luckily we have people like elon musk who are allowing all opinions to be spoken. twitter was becoming almost completely one sided. banning anyone with an opinion they did not agree with. hopefully more people like elon will help defeat the fascists who wish to censor so many.
@@flowgangsemaudamartoz7062 No, there isn't just "two sides" - there are many different sides, trying desperately to differentiate from each other as well as from their enemy, to the point of contradiction.
Unfortunately a lot of neonazis don't even care about the consequences authoritarianism might have for themselves. I used to be friends with a guy who, throuhough the end of our friendship, was progressively seduced by nazism, despite him being a drug addict. We would often argue with him that in nazi Germany he would be among the people who got sent to a concentrationcamp. His reaction was akin to something like "yeah, well it probably would be better for society if it was so". To this day I can't help but think that the reason most people develop this fascist brain worm to begin with is self hate...
Not really surprised through a historical perspective. The Freikorps, whom many members became Nazis, generally hate EVERYONE and EVERYTHING that happened after 1918. The see anyone not in uniform as lazy cowards who couldn't or doesn't care to understand their pain and the government a pack of dirty traitors who stabbed them on the back...
Conservatism in all forms has a connection to isolation, and the embrace of it seen in people like Robert Frost or Edward Hopper. In it’s most extreme, Fascism, it predates on social isolation and is built of self hatred and self destruction. If one has ever felt that those things, Fascist arguments seem to become more pertinent even though they are evil.
I strongly agree with that assesment. It fits with the whole facts and logic aesthetic. My hypothesis: the emotions driving their behaviour are shameful (guilt, jealousy, hatred, insecurity, greed) and as such they can not acknowledge them. When you don't acknowledge your emotions you can't control them and they end up controlling you. It leads people to these headspaces where their beliefs are irrational, drivin by rage, but in their minds is all just pure logic and harsh truths. Meanwhile they are just projecting their self hate onto others.
@@vibesmcgoodson768 i beg the differ in some aspects, mainly the whole emotions thing- The nazis grew in a post war landscape, filled with misery, social and economic instability combined with a feeling of hatred and humiliation, the terms of Versailles lead Germany to it's future path not the nazis, let me elaborate. The german spirit was crushed, the terms were harsh and as a nation it got isolated, in this nest a hatred grew but it had no obvious aim so it lingered in every german soul, some blamed the politicians who worked to subdue the war effort, some the kaiser(for being such and imbecile which he was, and more than that), the French, English or Americans, anything to act as an cathartic but some( although a long antisemitism sentiment in Europe since the medieval times) chose to redirect all those sentiments to jews(and other races but mainly the jews). For a long time the nazis were insignificant as a group, barely getting 2% of the votes, the economy was improving and so their promises of a national rebirth and security and hard line nationalism went generally unheard but when the wall street collapse the economy got fucked( in many countries but especially in Germany)- the radicals were split into nazis and communists( bigger), both getting more and more votes in the elections but no where near the necessary %. The political class fearing the bolsheviks decided to make a coalition of sorts with Hitler, judging that he could be easily controlled and put in a junior position, to repel the soviet influence. After more beatings, the parliament on fire, the emergency decree of Hitler and the death of Hidenburg, Hitler merged the two offices thus becoming basically a dictator. The hard line antisemitic policies of the nazis were also getting more and more genocidal, although not quite yet. The racial problem began to work as a daily routine, just an order to follow, not much hate left ,only a policy to follow. Everything was efficient, in order like a machine and it worked bloody well- the fanaticism was retained and indulged only with a few( comparatively to the ones who dont). At the core yes, they were "projecting" their pain and anger, misery and humiliation but over the time it evolved, transformed into something rational and logical- a desire for control and order( with suicidal policies based on race)
For sure! But, hopefully the video can reach them and, if anything, their comments will support my argument that fascism is on the rise, which some people might still be downplaying.
@@TheCanvasArtHistoryYou mean the joining of the State with private companies? Like Democrats collaborating with social media companies to censor and ban people?
@@airplanes_aren.t_real There are an incredible amount of factors that could explain it and, like any social phenomena, it’s hard to accurately diagnose. Economic struggle and social alienation is often pointed out. As a leftist, I have my own beliefs in how to answer this pain and these struggles, but they get quite complicated as they advocate for radical systemic change in society. Fascism promises to answer these problems with simple solutions, by blaming an external threat, by advocating for traditional values, by falling back to nationalism… These are easy and simple solutions with no systemic change aside from the persecution of minorities. It’s a lot easier to think of that and to act upon it. Most people are increasingly dissatisfied with the world. I am. Frankly, if you aren’t dissatisfied with the world, there might be something wrong with you. The question is how do we change the world? Fascism advocates for changing it, without doing the heavy lifting of actually attacking systemic changes. That makes it an, easily marketable, easily communicated, easy solution.
As a german I grew up hearing about Nolde only as an artist, who was prosecuted by the Nazis. It seems that he managed to sweep his own believes quite well under the rug. My parents (who are not by any means nazi supporters) even used to have the sunflowers hanging in their hallway...
The art world is full of contradictions and artists are often horrid individuals or fascists, even David Bowie said he was a fascist in an interview. For me it is a humane gesture to consider the art above the individual and personally I probably would have no problem with those paintings.
I love this channel so much! I’m 15 and I don’t know much about art but I love history. This mixes them together and makes art so much more interesting for me and even inspired me to go to an art museum! Thank you for the quality content!
Art is a window to what the times were like for the people that lived through them so learning the historical context in which it was made (as well as the personal context, if known) will make you understand and appreciate a piece much more. Likewise, appreciating art from a certain era will allow you to more deeply understand said era. Keep learning kiddo and enjoy the museum!
Be careful who you let label "fascists" for you. Personally I think the people that supported lockdowns, mandates and censorship are pushing fascism pretty hard.
@@gregpaul882 You act like that's a problem rather than the fact that you're a NeoN*zi masquerading... incredibly poorly as a simple "skeptic". I certainly don't mind being taught history by Jewish people. At least when I do, I'll know they're doing it correctly, unlike with you degenerate, subhuman N*zi filth. Get some mental help, you deranged lunatic. You're not fit to be in civilized society the way you are now.
We all admire the fact that your videos really go into detail in regards to matters concerning art. We all hope we get to see more content like this along the way.
As a german myself who saw many of Nolde's paintings in person I have to admit I enjoy his unique style of impressionism, especially the jokeresque appearance some of the characters in his paintings display, but based on his ideology I could never buy a copy of one of his paintings and hang it in my home. It would just feel wrong to honor a supporter of Nazi ideology, no matter how great of an artist he was, in this way. Great video as always, I really appreciate the political and ethical messaging your videos convey, as it's focused on making the world a better place.
True. Can't destroy art. We shouldn't buy or collect his works, so there is only one option - public display with all the information about the author.
while it is true that some fascist could just take pictures of said art and print it off in their home, anybody of any political and ideological leanings can do that, and also its just a printout, it doesn't capture the meticulous care and texture of the artwork itself and due to how easy it is to print stuff or save photos digitally where you can copy-paste infinitely, its practically worthless.
So It is okay for artist to be lefties and commies but not right wingers, fascists or national socialists? You're all bunch of p*ssies. I would buy his paintings, and a lot more paintings from fascists because I don't give a shit. And one more thing, they were right about many things.
Interesting side note: A painter based on Emil Nolde is one of the main characters of one of the most important German post war novels, „The German Lesson“ by Siegfried Lenz. In it, the story of a conflict between the painter and the local police officer is told from the perspective of the policeman‘s son. Unlike Nolde, the painter in the novel is banned from painting during the Nazi rule. He then begins to create „invisible paintings“ in his mind. I think the novel is partly responsible for Noldes rehabilitation, as the character in the book does not sympathise with the regime after they ban him from working. The book was first published in the 1970s and there was a discussion about the glorification of the character and Nolde a few years ago. The novel was a staple for German students for at least two decades and therefore influenced how we perceive the model for the character. Personally, I really liked the painter in the novel and was shocked to find out about Nolde‘s loyalty to the party. Great video, as always, I really enjoy your channel!
I was radicalized into a community of neonazis when I was a (very stupid tbh) teenager. I had been bullied at school through most of my childhood, didn't speak with my father, was online all day, had no close friends and was mentally ill and undiagnosed, so it was quite the mix for disaster. This contradictory thing, of fawning over people and ideologies who you know hate your guts and think of you as inferior, was absolutely EVERYWHERE in that place, and in retrospect it should've been obvious how ridiculous everything was. Tons of people there were from LatAm. Honduras, Mexico, Perú, Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, and they still agreed on the superiority of le white europeans and used "mestizo" as a despective to discredit and make fun of detractors. There were lots of women, and they constantly posted about how it was not of the nature of females to be rational, that other women didn't know what they wanted and all they needed was strong men to put them in their place. I hung around and desperately wanted to be liked by people who constantly circlejerked about how "mental illness is a new-age buzzword for crybabies who don't want to better themselves", "Therapy is a lie and psychologists are out there to brainwash you", "su¡cidal people are weak and its good that they take themselves off the gene pool.", "bullied kids usually have it coming.", "women with bad relationships with their dads are insane and insufferable and never to be trusted.", "Women in general are wh0res and unintelligent by nature", "Latinos in general are inferior when compared to people in europe or (white ofc) USamericans.". Only after I hit the bottom of the barrel in regards to my mental health and had the revelation of ""I will never find understanding in any of these people. They're not my friends, their entire community is built around stomping over the "weak" so they can continue LARPing about being great men who chase glory from their cringeass twitter accounts."" I started to realize everything there was just vile and insane and I should've hit the bricks years ago.
I'm glad you climbed out of that dark pit, I hope you are well now Also it's good that you share your story, you can prevent more unfortunate people from falling in this sick trap
What makes me really happy is the fact that my favorite art Chanel ain’t afraid to be political, despite how easy it would really be to do so, but without politics we wouldn’t have the complete picture.
@@golkor9879 Still giving a more complete picture than one that willingly ignores the inherent politics of the artist and the political climate they lived in, though.
I think separating art from artist can be done only as a way to enjoy it, but never as a way to ignore the ways its problematic like, you can enjoy looking at a nazi artists paintings, but you have to look at it, keeping in mind that the art was affected by the way that person saw the world
So what? If a person has a distasteful ideology, everything they ever touch is somehow tainted by it? I have trouble seeing anything Nolde painted as Fascist propaganda.
a genius can be a bad person. you dont have to (and i think nobody is) dismissing the intelligence of specific bigots or fascists. if anyoen is dismissing them for anything, its being good role models, icons, or people to look up to, admire, or respect. just because these people you listed were intelligent, doesnt mean their words and ideas arent affected by their ideals. that should always be kept in mind. critical thinking and all that
Fascists also value loyalty to an almost pathological degree. Their leaders often talk about loyalty in their ascension speeches as a key virtue. So I also think that a lot of fascists have a magical grasp of how loyalty, even in the face of targeting, will protect them in a talismanic way from betrayal by their own idols.
This is absolutely a major factor. Fascism appeals greatly to people who are highly insecure about being taken care of in a scary and cruel world. The desire for a substitute parental structure is strong. Fanatical displays of loyalty are directly akin to fanatical displays of religious devotion in order to impress a deity presumed to be watching. Or, circling back, displays of familial loyalty to maintain the approval of parents. At a basic level, fascist thinking functions to let people justify supporting the "Leopards Eating Faces" party. Fascism, by nature, requires an ever-shrinking pyramid of acceptable in-groups, ranked by level. In order to maintain control and loyalty through fear, fascist leaders must keep finding new threats. This means lower levels of the pyramid become unacceptable - the tiers of unclean persons, who now become enemies. Eventually, fascists eat their own. When the only people left to vilify are your own supporters, you do so. And most of those supporters would never think it could happen to them until it does. The story of Nolde however, does remind us that the fascist delusion and desperation is extremely strong. We like to think that people will "learn their lesson" and wake up, or become contrite. That often does not happen.
@@bluedotdinosaur I don’t agree with that at all to be honest. I believe fascism appeals to the masculine drive to be the one doing the protecting. I mean every fascist wants to be the leader. There that quote, “everybody wants to be the ducce”. It takes an exceptional leader to unify fascists into a common movement, instead of merely disparate individuals pursuing their own version of fascism, all joining forces because it advances all of them. I believe it’s socialism that appeals to insecurity about protection. Women overwhelmingly vote for socialist policy for this reason. They don’t want fascism as it would necessitate actually having to do stuff. Fascism demands that YOU be strong. Socialism will make the government strong for you. That’s the theory. Look at Yukio Mishima, bit of a meme but it’s true, the guy became hardcore because of fascism or adopted fascism because he is so hardcore already. One thing absolutely never mentioned in leftist critique of fascism is that fascism actually values (or at least espouses to) effort and attaining strength. What you have said is entirely against the demonstrable fact, much lamented by leftist rags, that the far right are physically strong, “overly masculine” and obsessed with combat sports and weight training. It may be a bit of a larp but that’s evidence of strength coming out, even if it is hamstrung by modernity, like yeah they can’t be soldiers for anything important anymore but they can buy a tomahawk and go camping. I always saw the larp aspect as more of a problem with literally everyone else making the life of a true man impossible in current age. Mishima is an interesting one too because there was no threat, no in group/out group, and no aspect of fear. He was about casting away fear, using your strength to do actual stuff. He even encouraged his enemies to become strong and even violent if they wished. Perhaps that’s more fascistic mind than fascistic policy, IDK what you’d say about that. I’d say also most of what you said applies to all ideologies. “Left always eat their own” is mad cringe but totally true. Also we don’t really have any evidence for the ever decreasing circles. The lines in the sand seem to be quite concrete to me. I know less about Italy but for Germany they seemed quite stable on what the problems facing them were, perhaps they didn’t get around to mission creep? Nolde and his art were not supported by the initial standards of the Nazis. He merely didn’t accept it because he believed in Nazism. They didn’t change what was and wasn’t okay, they merely got around to him in the end, for good or bad. Personally I hate his work but I don’t care if he paints some nasty as garbage in his bedroom or whatever, banning him was mean imo. Hitler the artist never would’ve supported Nolde, no aspect of power creep or changing in group/out group needed.
Can you make these videos longer? I like to listen to them when I make art and I’d love for them to be like 20-30 minutes. Some people might not have the attention span but they always feel like they are over too soon.
i feel like the videos are concise and to the point, if there is more of important information that he's leaving out for some reason... then sure. but who wants a video filled with time expanding fluff
Some channels with shorter videos edit together multiple episodes into "omnibus" formats, grouped by year or by thematic links as discerned by the channel. Those may be easier options this Creator can do that fills that role for you...he may even like doing that grouping as a curatorial exercise, so he can add a specialized intro that links a few episodes together. Just offering omnibus idea bc I see other channels have done it well, in multiple communities, & stretching videos out a bit might feel like a small ask, but depending on their practices, Content Creators who tend to make videos that are consistently shorter or longer length or in certain formats etc may have good reasons for producing it in a certain way --- that's often their natural "setpoint", where they create their best in their current life situation. Also I'm sure you didn't mean to forget saying "please" to a person you're requesting more from?
If you want a meandering video about this topic, I would suggest Jacob Geller 's video "whose afraid of modern art" it expands on this subject and discusses art in the form of video games as well
Just putting this out there for those who it may concern: There's a neat novel based on Emil Nolde's hidden paintings, called „Deutschstunde” by Siegfried Lenz. Remember quite liking it, back when I read it in my 20s.
Something I hear often from indie musicians who write a very personal song and then they release it, is that they know it will be interpreted differently by the people who hear their song, as we all have our own experiences that inform how we view the world. Two people who look at an art piece will always see something differently, so there is merit to the idea you can separate art from artist. But as experience goes, learning the origins of a art piece also changes your viewing experience, learning the origins of the work does tie the artist to the art. The search for meaning in art can lead you down finding more about the artist, yourself the viewer, and the society both lived in. Aside from someone viewing art completely vane, the most optimal outcome is to guide the viewer to a endpoint and move on from the piece. Like you did here.
If I remember correctly, I learned about Nolde in art class but we didn't discuss his political ideology or association pre-1945. Thank you for this very interesting and important video!
The work you are doing is fascinating to me. Thanks for everything, I feel like i'm having the opportunity to assist freely to a university class that sum up art history.
@@DemonOfEndor They are indeed. I remember when I came to no longer believe the mainstream narrative surrounding Hitler and Nazism, I decided to finally check out his paintings. I’d heard frequently that they were rubbish, that he was fuming because he got rejected for being crap at art. Honestly they were pretty good. It wasn’t lack of skill that got him rejected. Some of my friends went to art school and they were SHIT. I wholeheartedly believe that they thought it was boring art and not DEGENERATE, cutting edge, ugly ass, vacuous, meaningless modern art. I mean at a similar time, that famous urinal “art” was created… I love how we pretend that sometimes certain institutions don’t have trends. Science is a big one. Clearly early 20th century art establishment is another. If I were Hitler I’d think the world has surrendered to ugliness, given up its commitment to beauty, which improves lives. You’d be livid. It was arguably his paintings that made me fully accept I’d been utterly hoodwinked as a child about Hitler. Seeing his work and then what WAS deemed art by the establishment was just ridiculous.
@@eldontyrell4361 what mainstream narrative about Hitler? You make it seem like some insidious character assassination in a rather easy binary against “modern art” which didn’t really exist. Hitler applied to the notoriously conservative Academy of the Arts and failed the admission test with a verdict “drawing exam unsatisfactory”. Hitler’s art works were lacking certain fundamental things and was not good at drawing/painting people or figures. The rector of the academy said Hitler’s exams “incontrovertibly showed [his] unfitness for painting” and that admission was “out of the question”. His work was considered to show ability in the field of architecture and he was encouraged to pursue that instead. Hitler had failed math and physics so this was not possible. It was a serious blow to Hitler and he was reduced to painting copies of famous tourist scenes in watercolour and he even admitted himself that “I only painted that stuff to make a living” Hitler’s youth friend, August “Gustl” Kubizek had this to say about Hitler’s work, “the rapid catching of an atmosphere, of a certain mood, which is so typical of a watercolour and which, with its delicate touch, imparts to its freshness and liveliness. This was missing completely in Adolf’s work.” Even though he noted that Hitler painted with “painstaking precision” his ambition was only ever to paint “pleasant little pictures”. I think it speaks volumes about a regime’s insecurities when it categorizes what can not be acceptable in aesthetics.
@@DemonOfEndor my dear fellow, what you have written is not entirely accurate. Hitler was rejected (twice) from the National Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna and what was being taught there at that time had very little to do with the diverse modernist styles that were grouped under the entartete kunst exhibition. Oskar Kokoschka (who was defined as a “degenerate artist”) called the same academy a “pompous, old-fashioned, irrelevant institution”. If you are willing to exercise your objectivity, I welcome you to consult the list of “trendy” artists in the entartete kunst exhibition to see how many attended the Academy that rejected Hitler and report back with your findings. Furthermore, there are several artists (mostly those grouped under “neue sachlichkeit”) who also deployed “classical beauty” in their work and were very well versed in the techniques of the “old masters”. Rudolph Schlichter (also a “degenerate”) even did two portraits of Ernst Jünger. Unfortunately any of these works were instantly discredited by portraying anything to do with Weimar era “decadence” and the depictions of horribly crippled World War I veterans was considered unpatriotic. Lastly, I think it is interesting to compare and contrast that Emil Nolde was rejected from the academy of fine arts in Munich. Afterwards he took a few years of private painting classes to develop his skills. Quite a different approach than resorting to painting copies of tourist postcards.
I have come to believe that artists are often drawn to extreme political or religious philosophies, in part because of the detachment from reality of these worldviews. The very artificiality of these constructed realities has an aesthetic appeal. I hardly blink when I learn that a favorite artist has insane ideas. We must always bear in mind that when we see art, we are usually seeing the very best the artist has to offer. My great-grandmother, who married a writer, warned my mother to never fall in love with a writer through his letters. We should beware of falling in love with artists through their art.
@@c3cxla the detachment is the artist’s creation. All art is some kind of model of reality. So it’s a kind of decoupling. It’s easy to get lost at that point. After coming back to the initial comment above the more I think that this observation is correct.
You know, I'm Jewish, queer and leftist. Nazi Germany wouldn't think twice before sending me away. But I can't help but sympathise with this artist at least a little. This man was, at his heart, afraid that the culture and world he loved so much are being destroyed by people like myself, and that fear drove him to support people who hurt him as well. I don't think this sympathy can help bring a fascist back, i don't know what can, but it's kind of tragic in a very specific way. Like an abusive relationship almost. He refuses to leave what hurts him because they sold him lies about the world and made themselves the only ones who can save him. It's rare i feel sympathy for fascists, let alone Nazis, and my sympathy doesn't mean i wouldn't punch him if i were to run into him, but idk. Something about art. Maybe it's that i draw. I can't imagine not drawing.
This sentiment was echoed in the recent "Checkmate, Lincolnites" video. In the series, the video creator plays both himself and a stereotypical Confederate defender who actually quotes real life apologists from RU-vid and other sources. Over so many episodes, it's evident that the videos are aimed at educating the mislead because there is sympathy for people who are deluded. But that sympathy is met with constant derision, resentment, and rage. Fascists are people who deserve to be better people, but the nature of fascism rejects the very concept that they could be misled.
@@stratospheric37 I am anti-theocracy, so I don't think any religion should have control over a state. That said, I think that any state should protect people of all religions and ethnicities from violence and oppression. So I support the mission of Jews being able to build communities in their ethnic homeland, but I don't support the forced displacement of others for that purpose. However, if someone refuses to sell to someone not on the basis of money but on the basis of religion or ethnicity, I support the state punishing that person for allowing their bigotry to harm someone else economically. It's complex.
I wrote a song years ago called Mirage For Rent. The first two lines are, "Your greatest hero tears your world apart. Even a monster can create a work of art." The creation and the creator are not the same. To assume they are would be like punishing the innocent children of horrendous criminals. Artists are, more often than not, inherently damaged individuals, especially the great ones.
We are all beings with social responsibility, part of overlapping circles of relationships. Artists are kind of outsiders… Or truly outsiders… Or like to think of themselves as outsiders… And observers… and commentators… they create artifacts which can have beauty and value and truth depicted, displayed, and encoded within them. So it is possible to separate the artist from their creation. But… And I’m not going to present a solution here. I just think it’s necessary for us to be able to go from The micro… Which might be the smallest detail in a given work of art to the macro which is the largest context we can conceive of. And somewhere in there is the function of a piece of art… And the inspiration for it and the meanings behind it and the meanings for it… And all the interpretations of it. And, of course… We are free to absorb the work of art but any of these levels of awareness. But once you find out something unsavory about a particular artist, or a particular military hero… Or a particular political figure… What are we to do then?
@@JohnnyArtPavlou good comment. I’m very right wing and that’s my major disagreement with other, less right wing people, the idea that we should separate artist from the art, entirely. The mind informs the art. Art doesn’t just appear. Proper art is one or both of these two things, beautiful/well crafted, or meaningful. Without the creator we cannot have meaning, only that which we inscribe. Everything that person saw and believed went into any meanings behind art, the artist has an undeniable role in creating meaning/function in their art, to not understand the artist is to not understand the art IMO. Wether you want to believe it or not the artists beliefs motivate their attitudes to their own work. Granted I think this is very separate to the retarded, knee jerk response to just “cancel” every creation of someone because they said n*gger 8 years ago.
It’s better not to have heroes. Take inspiration… And build yourself into a hero. Or build yourself into so many to be proud of. I just found out that the artist Emil Nolde was a Nazi. You know he was kind of a Expressionist and Hitler didn’t like his artwork. Hitter put his work into the déménage art show…Nolde still stuck with Hitler.
Respect. Greatly appreciate your channel…love the historical info. One of the comments opened my mind : fascistism is an abusive relationship with those who chose to stay with it as Nolde did. Fascinating. I have always liked his work..
It's really not that difficult to comprehend why he still attached himself to Nazism even after being ridiculed by the Nazis. He was willing to swallow this minor disrespect because he still wholeheartedly subscribed to the worldview they propagated, and believed them to be a necessity so long as the fantastical Jewish threat still existed. I don't necessarily see it as an illness because that takes away a certain degree of responsibility from himself. He wasn't sick, he was simply someone who believed what he believed, and what he believed was foul.
This story gives me similar vibes to that time Blair White did a "debate" with a bunch of conservatives (I forgot what it was about but I'm pretty sure they also talked about children transitioning and all that stuff) and this one woman continuously berated and insulted her for being trans and said that she wanted nothing to do with her and it was just horribly awkward.
yeah, every time I see someone in the LGBTQ+ community expressing conservative or sometimes fascist-adjacent views, I sit there and I ponder just how much someone has to devalue themselves to think that appeasing this one group of people who don't care about them matters
Zdzisław beksiński was a Jewish person who lived through the nazi party in Poland and his art is horrifying and dystopian. He is also called the nightmare artist. I think he's a perfect fit for an artist who was a victim of facistism.
@@kins_crow i love beksinski a lot, but there is more than one painting where he paints some huge eldritch monster with a hammer and sickle, and art historians say that it's because he thought communism had ravaged the slavic countries. i understand historical trauma though, so many poles i've talked to blame communism for everything, as if naziism weren't ever a thing, and as if the return to capitalism after the dissolution of the USSR wasn't what actually fucked everyone over
@@SirCommoner I think it's because the Soviets invaded the other half of Poland, and they didn't leave as soon as the nazies, and took the opportunity to capture the other half too. More Poles live who experienced communism, and much fewer live who experienced German occupation.
I seriously have no idea how you don’t have millions of subscribers. Amazing channel, amazing work. I find that your videos keep me connected to art especially when I don’t have time to create my own. its always a great feeling getting to interact with artists I never knew of/know little about through each video. Bravo!!
Thanks for another great video. I thought I knew the story of modern art amidst the Nazi era but I hadn’t known Nolde was a Nazi himself. Has this come to light/ been emphasized by art historians more recently? (I learned most of my art history back in the 80’s)
I'm currently getting my Master's in Art History and my professor for my 20th Century German Art course was very careful to point out Nolde's fascist ideology. I think his influence on Modern art and the fact that he was a major Expressionist may have discouraged talk on the subject, but I wouldn't take my word on that. The political complexities of the period tend to get flattened out by the fact that the nazis were scum, but Modernism and particularly Expressionism were actually championed by some Nazi party members. Hitler liked artists such as Adolf Ziegler and Arno Breker better, though, and so Ziegler (who was actually referred to as "The Master of the Pubic Hair") got put in charge of the Degenerate Art Exhibition. He was a very conservative painter himself, and so it was he who was most responsible for the numerous pieces by Nolde in the exhibit. Even Ziegler eventually fell out of favor after suggesting that maybe the Reich should consider peace negotiations and Werner Peiner took his place.
I think I remember seeing his works at the LA County Museum of Art, and the accompanying descriptions of the work on the wall did point out that he was aligned with the Nazi party. But my memory might be hazy on the details - if it wasn’t LACMA, it was somewhere else. I’ve seen some exhibitions be more hesitant about bringing up important controversial details about certain artists, so as someone who wasn’t really familiar with Nolde and his work beforehand I appreciated that they actually mentioned his political affiliation.
The fact that the things you believe in and support can be used against you under a different interpretation of it is not a defining feature of fascism, but a universal property of all ideologies and political systems.
The point is that authoritarian ideologies are even more susceptible to that as they give an immense concentration of power in the hands of a few. If I support capitalism and capitalism turns against me, I might need to work a shit job and put most of my income into rent, but I’d still be able to, granted with more difficulty, to purchase art supplies and display my work. If I support fascism and fascism turns on me, it could lead to censorship or, worse, death.
@@TheCanvasArtHistory Censorship has existed in all types of countries, if not most, the US and capitalist countries included. Censorship of pornographic art, communist texts, the portrayal of gay or interracial relationships, blasphemous books, etc. It's only weird if you compare it to modern, rich, liberal countries, because by contrast anything else is authoritarian.
@@GalaxiaTokyo I would even argue that modern, rich, liberal countries are authoritarian as well. The authoritarianism is applied differently and in different degrees. Fascism applies it to the extreme. You can’t equate the censorship of pornographic art (which I was a victim of in my last video) and the censorship of “degenerate art”. This nuance is essential, especially if you want to prevent the ills of fascism.
@@TheCanvasArtHistory How is it different though? Aren't you just saying that it is less bad to censor things which you accept as morally problematic but it is very bad to censor things which to you seem acceptable? Like, you are just using your subjective beliefs to define what is censorable. In the same way that to westerners the prohibition of depictions of Muhammad seems absurd and extreme just because the cultures are very different. You could objectively say that a country is more authoritarian than other, but saying that one ethical judgement is better than the other enters into is pure subjectivity, unless you are imposing a liberal utilitarian standard to make the judgement.
@@GalaxiaTokyo Censoring pornographic art (or pornography in general) is bad, but doesn’t necessarily lead to the subjugation of a minority of the population. Censoring “degenerate art” because it’s pushed by communist jews who are trying to destroy white culture is quite different. The latter results in the oppression (and sometimes genocide) of a whole population. The former, though bad, does not result in the subjugation of a whole segment of a population. Please don’t minimize the harm of fascist censorship by comparing it to less harmful forms of censorship.
I suspect Nolde was less an individualist and believed more in his people than is the norm for the West these days. There are PLENTY of cultures where individual aspiration is subordinated to the good/will/whim of the community. Also, beware explanations such as "He was mad" or "He was under the spell of ." Madness and witchcraft explanations are proffered to keep you from investigating and getting at the truth of things.
I think this is twofold: Firstly, despite being condemned, he was still very successful in his career: For the years 1937, 1939 and 1941 he reported his highest income ever! He had good relations with Nazi officials and his works could still be purchased in galleries. Ironically, the "Degenerate Art" exhibition might have helped his fame. He reportedly felt "misunderstood" by the Nazi party and believed in mistakes made by subordinate persons and departments. Secondly, his role as a "victim" of the Nazi art politics is very controversial. After the war, his priority was the recovery of his personality (and his art) - being a Nazi was a bad look for him. The "Entnazifizierung" of Germany was a big deal as an avid Nazi supporter and antisemitic; and his only option was playing up his victim role. There are many records where he tries to convince Nazi officials to reinstate his status, but after Hitler had spoken against expressionism there was simply no way for them, even though there were a lot of Nazis who liked him and his art (most famously Goebbels, Hitlers right hand man and the minister of propaganda). The "painting ban" and the Unpainted Paintings have probably been played up in the after-war years. S. Lenz' novella "German lesson", one of the most famous stories of post-war Germany, is partly credited for this. It basically tells Nolde's story but omits his pro-nazi sentiment. So Tl;dr: He was a raging nazi believer, had good relations and sympathizers within the nazi regime and thus and excused their perceived "mistake", and his overall situation was probably not as bad as it seems.
@@fleurlion Thanks for your detailed reply, Lisa. Amazing how complex Nolde's situation as a Nazi artist was. Also amazing that the German Expressionism movement was so ideologically diverse. And I'm sorry I can no longer whole-heartedly embrace Nolde whose paintings is used to like.
@@barbaravoss7014 I feel you! I totally got sucked into the topic and Nolde is just such an ironic exemple of how facism and the people in power arbitrarily chose what is worthy ... and what is not.
Funny thing: I studied art history in college and while I had learned about the die bruke group, it was very sparse and Emil Nolde never came up, not even in self-study projects. It was like he didn't exist in the study materials whatsoever.
"The White race" Hitler believed in nordicism though, which was the superiority of 'Germanic peoples' over others. It's why they killed and targeted so many Slavs.
Totalitarian regimes turning against its own supporters is really common and its always been very common - all fascist, nazi and soviet regimes were based on fear and paranoia where literally anyone could become "the enemy" at any time. The only thing that makes this case a little bit different is that art was involved, which doesnt change much about the thing itself.
The Wall by Pink Floyd touches on this stuff pretty well. Throughout the album the main character essentially goes through all kinds of trauma and alienation, to the point that he shuts himself off from the world, and eventually emerges as a fascist himself.
The character "Pink" didn't emerge as a facist, he hallucinated he was one while forced on stage in a soporific fugue and then had a mental breakdown due to regret and self hatred immediately after.
His seclusion was not the sole reason he saw himself as the Führer. The main reason was the unwavering loyalty and appraise by his fanbase, and his growing disconnect with them. They saw him as a more-than-human demigod, who has no flaws and can do no wrong. He could directly ostracize some of his fans, and his other fans would tear them to shreds. The "worms" were the contempt and disgust he felt towards the unwashed masses, groupies and yes-men around him, who treated him as an object of worship. He sings about the masses being indoctrinated by the school system, yet the people praising his work let themselves be indoctrinated by him.
You can never sever the art from the artist, the artist creates art influenced by the way they view the things they’re depicting and inspire the way abstract art looks. Zdzisław Beksińki is a good example of it, his paintings especially specialize in dystopian surrealism which is clearly influenced by his experiences growing up in Poland in the aftermath of WW2 and during the war
I think art is a synonym of emotions. To say art could be separated from the artist, is to say spoken words could be separated from the person saying them.
I absolutely agree. Art without context has the potential to be totally different than knowing the story behind it, and knowing as much can utterly change it. It's silly, but it makes me think of that Adolf Hitler quote that was juxtaposed next to a picture of Miley Cyrus (I think?) that was a meme some years ago. Either way, art is a product of its environment and its creator.
@@zapazap AI is just an extention of its creator(s); a function, a tool. The hypothetical "cyber" or "computer" life form(s) on the other hand... Well, "what then?" indeed, or, "so what?", more appropriately. So what that they(/it), hypothetically, wouldn't be made out of flesh and proteins? I don't think it'd make them(/it) any *fundamentally, categorically* "less" than us humans, would it...?
@@tcrijwanachoudhury You would get items *indistinguishable* from human creations. It is easy to write a program that will in time generate any text file. When you have a first edition of War and Peace in your left hand, and an independent computer generated printout of the same work, will the text be distinguishable?
Another awesome video daring to speak up against fascism. Thank you! As an advocate for people living with mental illness, I just to make a very small point: "fascism" is considered a "societal mental disorder" and not a metal illness. The vast majority of people living with mental illness live quiet lifes and are the victims of discrimination and violence created and executed by right wing politics as demonstrated by fascists in the US now days and sadly increasing all over the word. Thank you.
Solidarity comrade. As someone who has suffered with mental illness and addiction, and who has spent years off and on the streets struggling with homelessness, I have felt first-hand the results of far-right policy being implemented in my own home town in France. The cruel and repressive policies were justified by those who supported and created them by claiming on the one hand that they were a "necessary cruelty" needed in order to force homeless people to take the steps needed to "get their lives back on track" whilst on the other hand and simultaneously they were presented as a "deserved punishment" targeting those perceived to be "profiting and taking advantage of the system" because they're lazy or criminal or both. Thanks to these measures, that included the closing of shelters and charities, the over-regulation and policing of soup kitchens and food-banks, the closing of public places such as parks and markets where homeless people would shelter from the rain and preform menial tasks in exchange for a little pay, ask for spare change and leftover food-stuffs etc... Not only did the over-all homeless and precariously housed population skyrocket, but so did the number of homeless people, especially women and girls, who were victims of violence. Living through is what got me engaged in politics, it's what made me a socialist and it's what incited me to engage in the struggle against fascism and capitalist exploitation for as long as I live.
@@littlestone1541 _"f ar-rig ht policy being implemented in my own home town in France."_ You don't have such policies in France, hun. You don't even have a "fa r rig ht". Stop post ing nons ense and go and eat a bagu ette or something.
@@littlestone1541 _"it's what made me a socialist and it's what incited me to engage in the struggle against fascis m and capit alist exploitation for as long as I live."_ Hate to burst your bubble but not only is social ism c anc er... but fasci sm was also a form of soci alism and they opposed capit alism. So ciali sm is sl ave ry, capi tali sm is free dom.
@@Historia.Magistra.Vitae. Oh thank you so much for "explaining" the politics of my home country to me "hun"! where would I have possibly been without you?! I guess my years of university courses in advanced sociology and poli-sci, as well as my thesis "On The Predictability Of The Probable Rise Of Nascent Fascist Movements In Western Style Liberal Democracies In The Modern Post Social-Democratic Era" was all a completely useless endeavor and a complete waste of time, as it seems that you, anonymous RU-vid comment guy, have debunked everything that I ever thought that I knew about the politics of the country, not to mention the town, in which I happen to live and where I have been politically active and civically engaged in a myriad of ways for the last two decades, with your flawlessly argued facts and logic! Wow! Thank you so much. I am humbled. 🤯
My elementary school was named after Emil Nolde, we even had a bust of him near the entrance. We were simply told that the nazis forbid him to paint so he had to do it in secret. I only found out 15 years later that He actually sympathized with the nazi movement, really left me with mixed feelings
It is not such an unbelievable story. He kept his believes despite the fact that leaders of said believes were harming him. This story is happening in my country, Iran. Many of prisoners such is our "islamic" democracy are still defending the 1978 revolution and Islam. As a ex-muslim myself, I can assure you Islam is what these theocratic politicians are practicing here in Iran and Afghanistan.
I'm pretty sure this subject isn't really controversial. It only becomes one when a particular party gets called out for acting like one despite saying they're not 😂
On one hand there's this schadenfreude, a nazi got nipped by nazis. While on the other it's sad, that it didn't move him to self-reflection. So I suppose to me, the lesson is this: We can confront conventions through art, but that doesn't mean we are capable of confronting ourselves.
There’s no point trying to be one of the “good ones”, cuz fascists will still come at you with the same venom they give to those they deem “undesirable”
I’m always fascinated by the nuanced, often hypocritical nature of these artists and their political allegiances. Your Dali video was outstanding too. Thanks for all you do. I’m curious, what font do you use for your titles and pull-quotes?
As much as people wish they could separate art from artist, it is not an actual, possible thing. While it is undeniable that remarkable things can be done by awful people, as an artist you can no more separate my hand from what it creates than you can separate my mind from the brain it inhabits. Art is empty when removed from its creator, no matter how you reinterpret it or manipulate it.
Dude I just need to let you know that the subject matter you choose to focus your videos on is so mentally stimulating and interesting you are on the right track keep the magic flowing ❤
The idea of separating the artist from the art is silly especially when studying art and learning a lot of artists put their experiences and politics into their work. Even my own work, I've had a few friends point out how I've put some of my experiences into my work even when not intentionally doing so. Even my own self identifying fascist brother has done so (he's an artist too). It's hard to make art apolitical
Kinda, but this way of looking at art is limited. There are lots of works of art whichs power would be limited by reducing them to a mere extension of the artist as a person. The really powerful art sits always higher than the artists head does. Sometimes when I heard some artists I adore speak it was only irrelevant and dumb crap and you really wonder how they could create such intelligent art.
I appreciate your balanced and informative portrayal of Emil Nolde. The bold colors and blurred and overlapping shapes of German Expressionism is very beautiful. I cannot feel completely sorry for him since he didn't learn the lesson of persecution, where he did not develop compassion for other persecuted people especially the Jews-6 million genocide and other "undesirable people." How ironic that his art was considered degenerate among the many Jewish artists, and he still didn't change his beliefs. It's too bad he didn't grow emotionally and psychologically with his entrenched Fascism. It is still worthwhile to present his beautiful art while informing critical details of his personality as you did,
I like HP Lovecraft's short stories without liking HP Lovecraft as a person. Same with Dali. I don't think we can just "separate the artist from their art"...We have to be aware of the artist, but it doesn't mean that just because they were a horrible person that they made horrible work that can't be enjoyed. Just be aware of where it's coming from.
I really thought, when I first read the title, the video was about "the funny mustache man". Then I remembered the latter videos, said "is that Dali?" And I was wrong at both. Anyway amazing video as always.
Great video! Keep it up! It's always funny (in a very dark way) to see how people who willingly supported authoritarian regimes get treated like trash by them. "I didn't think the leopards would eat MY face!" and all that. And fascism is extremely prone to this, because of its need for an in-group and out-group to constantly exist. The in-group only gets smaller, while the out-group gets increasingly wider. One small misstep and you will end up on the wrong side of the line - you will become the enemy.
@@joriankell1983 Rather i believe it describes authoritarianism in general; fascism and communism are two flavors of it. Control is justified as a means to keep the in-group safe from the out-group--to keep the bloodline pure, to keep the country safe, to stop Them from eroding Our culture, etc. In the end it only serves to protect the most exclusive in-group, the people at the top. The leopards, if you will.
@@reedspun communism purposely erodes culture when it's installed. Fascism originally gained ground as an anti communist movement. They're not as comparable as you have illustrated.
@@joriankell1983 They are similar in that they are authoritarian. I will concede that they are different in principal, that communism seeks to replace existing culture with collectivism to justify itself and fascism seeks to use existing culture to justify its authoritarian policies. In the end, they both justify authoritarianism with promises that it's for the citizens' own good. Ideologically, yes, they are at odds. But they use many the same tools.
Great video that has excellent points! I would like to add to this: Interestingly, Goebbels was a fan of Nolde (/his work) and publicly stated that expressionism was a "german, nordic art". This was part of the "Expressionisdebatte" (expressionism debate) in Nazi-Germany. The debate was most heated in nazi circles but was also being discussed among Marxists and others (and not only in Germany, but in other countries too). Goebbels himself was basically Hitler's right hand and the minister for the Office Of Public Education and Propaganda ("Volksaufklärung und Propaganda" in German). This was the office that managed and controlled the arts, literature and the media. Only after Hitler himself took a stance against expressionism did Goebbels change his mind. I think the video made an excellent point about how fascism will not differentiate between people who support it or who don't. It will end the people who stand in its way. But it is so dangerous because there is no prior grand plan for what is acceptable and what is not. From one day to the other it can happen that the things that are okay (and the people who are fine) are not the other day. If Hitler had decided otherwise, expressionism could have a very different historical connotation today.
There's a lot of projection going on these days. We recently had the entire Canadian parliament salute a soldier who fought Russia in ww2. When they were our allies. There's definitely a rise in that kind of behavior.
6:38 how ironic. Also with how utterly Establishment your perspective is. Even today we see those who oppress dissent fall foul of their own vaunted ideals and routinely. With regard to Noldes work and as heartbroken as he might be, he probably simply believed the regime gravely mistaken. Even Nazism had competing and opposing inner notions.
"Evil is not destructive to the good alone but inevitably destroys itself as well. For evil, which lives solely by negation, cannot continue to exist on its own strength alone." I Ching, hexagram 23. Here in the USA, we see the former president attacking people who support him, yet they still cling to his coattails out of a deluded self-interest.
More or less the same happened on the Soviet side. Only there artists were first accepted, to give the regime good optics, but when they finally had seized power they banned everything except socialist realism - and persecuted artists working in other styles. Authoritarianism is a blight upon this world.
Spanning over 80 years (1932-88), socialist realism was an official art form with an unwavering idealization of life under Soviet rule after World War II.
I have an example. Me. I'm a muslim artist, whose degenerate _haram_ art are abhorred and made example of by muslims, yet I'd consider myself muslim. I know that in a ideal muslim world my art would be banned, burned, and myself shunned and deplatformed. Is it an illness? Maybe. But the pain is addicting I must say.
There is nothing more ironic than claiming that Picasso wasn't an artist. I mean, Picasso was so good that he dominated realist paintings when he was 14. He entered the university at that age, and in the university exam he was convalidated two entire grades and part of the third. Others, okay, but Picasso painted whatever the f*ck he wanted however the f*ck he wanted. He was also a communist and based AF, for instance, in 1937 he presented his painting "Gernika" (about the infamous bombing of the town of Gernika that year by German and Italian planes in the context of the Spanish Civil war), and when the German ambassador asked if he made it, Picasso responded: "No, your guys made it. I merely painted it."
The lesson from a fascist artist is that unless it's a propaganda piece or stated otherwise one shouldn't really look for meaning when there is none I, for one, don't think that Hitler's painting of Neuschwanstein had anti-Semitic undertones ngl.
OK, key issue with the final argument: you're working from a base assumption of self-preservation. They would argue selfishness. It truly does not matter to the collective mind if an individual suffers, lives, or dies as long as the collective thrives. It's not even a fascist issue inherently, it's a collectivist vs individualist issue. This is kind of an insurmountable problem: some people are perfectly willing to sacrifice their own happiness and even life for a cause they feel is worthy enough, others see this as a fundamental illness of the mind and that self-preservation and self-care is key above all else. The first group in turn sees the second as fundamentally ill for not being willing to sacrifice personal comfort in exchange for longer term benefit.
Concerning the whole "can we separate the artist from their art" debate, I believe there is no definite answer. Some people can make this separation and enjoy the experience. Others struggle with this division and find that their relationship with that piece of art has changed. Can you still enjoy that song even though it's from an alleged abuser? Do you still love those books even though you absolutely disagree with the author's personal beliefs? There truly is no right or wrong.
I think it would be cool if you did a vid on communist painters too, or maybe multiple videos because I'm sure there's plenty of good stories from the USSR and Communist China.
@@Tybold63he wont because it goes against his leftist propaganda you filthy monkeys, it’s hilarious how he tries to claim Fascism is a mental illness like some psych ward doctor which are pretty authoritarian, Nolde’s status as an artist being stripped is far better then today’s cultural marxists that run the art world making inauthentic artists culturally relevant such as Rupi Kaur, the rap industry, Damien Hirst, Pollock, Warhol, Basquiat, all cultural marxists while desiring fame and profit all have a tragic ending
Very astute and timely analysis; I had never known so much detail of Nolde's life and experience, which should indeed be instructive to any naive supporters of authoritarianism. Fascists thrive on hate. If they meet their goals, killing or otherwise suppressing their perceived adversaries, they will start turning on their own, because that is the only thing they know--to hate, oppress, and kill. Nolde was one of the lucky ones, to have survived the Nazi era with a substantial part of his artistic legacy enduring to the present, but this is precisely because the fascist regime he supported was defeated.
People aren’t fascist just for wanting to preserve the cultural and traditional art and architecture of their own culture/country/ethnic group, etc. Are Indians fascist just for wanting to preserve and build traditional Indian art in their country? Are Chinese or Arabs fascist just for wanting to have their traditional architecture in their countries? Are Native Americans fascist just for wanting to preserve their traditional art and customs?
Another lesson is that it's impossible to diagnose any moral position of the artist from a formal analysis (aesthetic content) of their work alone. The meaning of an artwork is inseparable from its social context, including the artist's biographical details such as intentions and reputation.
Have you done a video on the Futurists and Italian Fascism? I am also reminded of that arch "traditionalist" Julius Evola's distinctly modern art style that Hitler surely would have rejected.
Evola was never a fascist and he liked Nazism even less, nazis were suspecious of him from the start and he had falling with Fascism. Hitler rejecting dadaism isn't some kind of own of Evola.
