I am a dyed-in-the wool conservative. Should I be concerned that "the arts" are largely dominated by the political Left?

To establish my credentials as someone who is fit to comment on the matter, I think I should initially point out that I am in general very much "into" high culture:

I can recite around 100 lines of Chaucer in the original Middle English plus some mainstream Goethe poems in German. I know who Belisarius and Justinian were, J.S. Bach is my favourite composer and I rather like Canaletto. And my favourite song is in Latin. And my Serbian girlfriend has been very helpful in introducing me to lesser-known Russian literature. And I acknowledge modern genius in the form of Philip Glass and David Williamson. So it would be hard to brand me as a Philistine.

But I regret to say that I do not share the common assumption below that the arts are in general important. To me they are just a small niche in the entertainment scene. Somewhat to my distress, football entertains far more people and should in consequence be more deserving of conservative attention. I see no virtue in the fact that I personally enjoy more arcane forms of entertainment.

And I don't think that much is lost by inattention to the arts as we have them today. Any message in them is usually Leftist dribble and very few modern artists are of anything like the quality of the greats from our past. Catching up with the canon of Russian literature would give us all greater insights than reading anything from the vast outpouring of modern novels or attending to most modern stage-shows. Some modern productions will of course stand the test of time but the wearisome task of finding the wheat among the storm of chaff is not for me. The classic past offers much better prospects for finding artistic enjoyment. I would rather (for instance) put on my favourite video of Pergolesi's Stabat Mater, knowing that I will find great joy in that

Some works of art are undoubtedly politically influential. Orwell is the prime example of that. But the canon of classic English literature has much more potential to influence thought so promoting an awareness of that would seem to be a better task for conservatives. It was in his final year of High School that I discovered to my distress that my son had never heard of Coleridge or Wordsworth so there is much work to be done in that direction.

There are some notes about the sort of thing that I do and what I value here and here

Conservative political thought’s fractured history and philosophical developments should make for compelling artworks and literature. However, the Right is often perceived as the enemy of both the artists and writers, who predominantly fall under the Left’s protection.

Conservative political commentator Douglas Murray’s article "Publishing is a left-wing bubble" notes that those on the Left vastly outnumber those on the Right in the publishing industry. Birmo’s pride and prejudice show ARC grants need new rules written by postcolonial world literary studies professor Ben Etherington criticised Simon Birmingham’s decision to deny funding to arts and humanities projects.

The animosity between the progressive arts sphere and the political Right appears mutual: complaints about Woke publishing often feature in conservative discussions about the Australian cultural sphere, occasionally followed by a call for alternative media.

However, this article suggests several reasons for the Right to value and invest in the arts.

First, during 2020’s Covid-related funding reductions in the arts, I argued in "Anyone can do art – so why fund the Arts?" that art and literature are key to democracy. They allow us to model and exchange complex social experiences and arguments. The article then provided evidence to support a statement from Centre For Stories director Robert Wood on the need for resources in the arts:

‘It is fiction to think that art flowers without support. That it is only a calling that does not require resources.’

While the thinkers and organisations referenced in Anyone can do art were from the Left, there is no logical reason for the Left to monopolise the arts. Historically, parts of the Right have advocated for artists and writers who fled communist regimes. One cornerstone of libertarian thought is a novel, Ayn Rand’s "Atlas Shrugged".

Art allows for the coexistence of multiple truths without demanding one be ‘proved’ at the expense of all others. Topher Fields’ documentary "Battleground Melbourne" explores the costs of Victoria’s harshest Covid control measures. It was an emphatic recount that illustrated the rapid escalation in the state’s power, deterioration in social wellbeing, and mainstream media’s increasing approval of state-approved violence. The existence of Fields’ documentary does not discount, say, the efficacy of vaccination in reducing the severity of Covid symptoms in vulnerable groups, or the aggression and entitlement that some who opposed Covid vaccines exhibited. In the arts, two conflicting truths do not cancel each other out: they granulate our understanding of a complex world where people of different experiences and backgrounds attempt to coexist.

Advertisers have long understood that emotive stories, not hard facts and numbers, influence people to engage with products, services, and charity efforts. Right-wing thought is filled with storytelling material: it has a nuanced and diverse history of scrutinising social and cultural concepts such as nationhood, family, marriage, and community. Angela Dillard’s book "Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner: Multicultural Conservatism In America" examines strategies that ethnic and sexual minorities used to assimilate themselves into traditionally Anglo-European and Christian conservative movements. Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson’s book "Strange Justice: The Selling Of Clarence Thomas" considers tensions between African-American recognition, feminist concerns, and conservatism during Anita Hill’s sexual harassment allegations against Clarence Thomas.

Despite the profound discussions arising from fractures within the Right, the Australian vocabulary about right-wing thought is woefully limited. Australian conservative politicians are said to have ‘become left-wing’ if they express support for gay marriage or decriminalisation of abortion.

The prominence of unfavourable personalities further degrades public perceptions of the Right. Even people seeking to sympathise with the Right often preface their statements ‘I’m not on the Right but–’ Many are unaware of the Right’s profound intellectual history which studies the balance between a need for change and the maintenance of cultural integrity. The Right needs art more than ever to capture the public’s imagination.

While this article pushes for the Right’s appreciation of the arts, it does not support squirrelling into ‘alternative outlets’, an idea floated among various Right-wing outlets. Ideas that defy the progressive consensus of Australian arts industries may need to circulate among more sympathetic spheres (arts industries in non-Western countries) to gain initial momentum before Australians recognise its validity. Having a multitude of artistic and literary platforms framed around different values and tastes may improve our access to different perspectives on controversial issues. But these should still lie within a generally unified cultural sphere, rather than walled off into separate echo chambers. A unified cultural sphere allows for the acknowledgment of viewpoints across the political divide. Echo chambers are deaf to external information and descend into polarised stupidities.

Conservative commentators frequently note a progressive takeover in mainstream Australian arts and media. For example, Alexandra Marshall’s article "The Sydney Writers’ Festival: so woke you want to call for blood tests" observed the Sydney Writers’ Festival’s platforming of simplistic racial and gender identity politics. One may question or disagree with her derision towards Wokeness in the media. However, her observation about the conservative viewpoint’s absence begs an important question: where are the conservative creatives? The simplistic understanding of conservatism in Australia is unsurprising: deriding artists as ‘lefty snowflakes’ and siphoning out their money damage any chances of artists studying right-wing thought, let alone sympathise and be inspired by its nuances. If the Right is truly concerned about Leftist dogma in media and culture, it needs to be serious about regaining cultural territory through investment, training, and respect for artistic and literary practitioners.

In time, I would like to see Australian Right-wing and Left-wing writers and artists in conversation at national cultural events. A rehash of the ‘we are more similar than different’ conclusion may not directly answer questions like ‘should big churches be heavily taxed?’ or ‘why are fuel prices so high?’ But it may provide necessary reminders to people that political adversaries are simply humans with different priorities on particular issues, not demonic lunatics to be exiled from workplaces and social groups. That would go a long way in detoxifying political debates.

https://spectator.com.au/2022/07/can-conservatives-embrace-the-arts/

**************************************************

Wokeness - “Ex Uno Multis”

“E pluribus unum” or “out of many, one” is America’s national motto. Now due to wokeness, it is evolving into “ex uno multis” or “out of one, many”.

Wokeness perceives the world through the racist lens of Marxist ideology: oppressed and oppressors. It is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “aware of social and political issues, especially racism”. Wokeness is a fusion of the Marxist German Frankfurt critical theory school, and radical racist activism.

Marxist theory originally had the oppressed working class proletariat being exploited by bourgeois capitalist oppressors. Over the past 150 years, this has morphed into people of color (POC) being oppressed by the white race. Critical race theory, identity politics, cancel culture, gender studies, unlimited immigration, and the 1619 Project followed.

Western civilization, and American society in particular, are descending into Marxist hell holes similar to Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea. and China. Woke ideology is corrupting our society from within. Woke education is about denigrating positive aspects of Western civilization, and highlighting the negative through the Marxist lens of race. Since Western Civilization is derived from people of European descent (“white people”) then the evils of Western Civilization are due to white people. All other people are “people of color” and are therefore innocent.

Slavery was a feature of human history until Christian Western Civilization, at the beginnings of free market capitalism, began to eradicate it. Of the 12.5 million slaves sent to the New World from Africa, 388,000 or 3%, went to the United States.

The Islamic world was and is the greatest slaver in history. Not only did Muslims enslave more blacks than Europeans, but Muslim Turks also enslaved millions of eastern Europeans. Barbery Coast Muslim Arabs enslaved millions of Mediterranean Europeans, and conducted slave raids for blond sex slaves as far north as Iceland. Slavery was ended in the homeland of Islam, Saudi Arabia, in 1962. Slavery still exists in parts of Muslim North Africa and is practiced by groups such as ISIS.

Under Marxism, truth is malleable. It is based on power, and what becomes “the” truth becomes “my” truth. Gender theory has man becoming woman and vice versa. George Washington, instead of being the “Father of our Country”, becomes a “slave owner”. The New York Times “1619 Project” rewrites history so that, instead of America being founded in 1776 on the concept of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, America was founded on the oppression of POC in 1619, when the first slaves arrived in Virginia.

Woke Corporations

The goal of Marxist Wokeness is to weaken America internally by causing racial strife, economic strife, and cultural strife. Mandatory Covid shots and lockdowns; the strangulation of hydrocarbon energy for the pipe dream of so-called “clean energy”; massive debt leading to inflation; the ruination of the middle class; the breakdown of the family unit; the weakening of the military; and the indoctrination of our children into hating America, all of these lead to America becoming weaker and divided.

Corporations have become Woke due to Marxist ideology being taught in schools to students who are now in corporate leadership positions. Numerous examples of Woke Corporations include:

Nike - Headquartered in Oregon where Antifa runs amok, Nike’s 30th anniversary ad campaign features Colin Kaepernick, who is famous for kneeling during the national anthem at National Football League (NFL) games as a protest against racial injustice, and who is a supporter of Black Lives Matter. Nike kowtows to China with no outrage at Uyghur genocide, organ harvesting from the Fulan Gong religious sect, military aggression in the South China Sea, or threats to Taiwan.

National Basketball Association (NBA) - Earning billions of dollars in China, the NBA is silent on Chinese atrocities.

Disney - Protesting Georgia’s voting and abortion laws and Florida’s education law, Disney turns a blind eye to China’s atrocities. It threatens not to film in Georgia, but will film in China. Disney promotes homosexuality and transgender lifestyles to our young children.

Wall Street - Black Rock, with $10 trillion under asset management, invests billions in Chinese companies that threaten America. The phrase attributed to Lenin “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” is descriptive.

Numerous other Woke Corporations have and are participating in “ex uno multis” to divide and weaken America. Diversity is not our strength. Rather our strength is unity in the American creed of “all men and women are created equal; justice for all; and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.

We have met the enemy and he is us.

https://www.conservativehq.org/post/wokeness-ex-uno-multis

*************************************************

HSBC's virtue-signalling hypocrisy

Ah, HSBC. The Asian banking giant has raised some eyebrows in recent years with their endless antics to appear oh so right-on. Back in 2019, they ran a series of adverts proclaiming that ‘we are not an island’, ignoring the fact that, er, we very much are. More recently they’ve rushed to associate themselves with Halifax’s pronouns stunt and this week unveiled their latest progressive wheeze: offering ‘gender-neutral banking’. This means the bank will ‘stop collecting data on the gender of its customers across some products’ in order to provide ‘more inclusive services for non-binary and trans people.’

There’s a rich irony in HSBC now refusing to collect data on its customers, given its involvement in abetting the Chinese government’s crackdown on Hong Kong. HSBC not only publicly backed the draconian National Security Law but also froze the bank accounts of prominent pro-democracy activists in exile at the behest of Beijing, something that obviously involved keeping tabs on the troublemakers. Its chief executive, Noel Quinn bleated that ‘I can’t cherry-pick which laws to follow’; given the law claimed universal jurisdiction, it doesn’t exactly suggest pro Hong Kong democrats in London are safe with the bank, non-binary or not.

There’s an inconsistency too in HSBC’s latest announcement. For all their posturing about universal values and how ‘it’s vital that everyone can be themselves in the workplace’, a search of HSBC Saudi Arabia yields precisely zero results for ‘gender.’ Similarly, given their efforts to keep Beijing happy, Mr S has his doubts about how such progressive pronouncements will fare in China, where same-sex couples are unable to marry or adopt, and where there’s been a push back in recent years on depictions of homosexuals and ‘effeminate men’ on television.

Still, perhaps it’s better we’re talking about HSBC’s ‘values’ rather than basic banking functions. It was just seven months ago that the Asian giant was fined some £69.3 million here in Britain over ‘unacceptable failings’ and ‘inadequate monitoring’ in its anti-money laundering systems. Still, that’s nothing compared to HSBC Bank USA, which was fined a whopping £1.4 billion in 2012. It followed a US Department of Justice investigation into the bank’s failure to stop money laundering by Mexican drug cartels. If only Pablo Escobar had identified as an ‘Mx.’

Let’s hope that HSBC’s new ‘gender-neutral’ banking has better checks than its existing old-fashioned heteronormative system.

https://spectator.com.au/2022/07/hsbcs-virtue-signalling-hypocrisy/

****************************************************

How Gender Ideology Cost a Chicago Mother Custody of Her Child

Jeannette Cooper never imagined she’d lose custody of her only child.

A Chicago resident and lifelong educator who spent her entire adult life surrounded by children, Cooper considered herself a loving and responsible mother. After she and her husband divorced in 2015, she won custody of their daughter six days and seven nights a week.

Cooper says the two shared a happy, healthy mother-daughter relationship, bonding over their love for board games and progressive politics.

But on July 22, 2019, after a regular custodial visit to her father’s house, Cooper’s daughter, then 12, refused to come home. The next morning, she insisted not only that she was transgender, but that she felt “unsafe” around her mom.

Cooper didn’t understand. Her daughter never before had exhibited signs of gender dysphoria. In fact, her daughter exhibited many more traditionally feminine behaviors and preferences than she herself ever did, Cooper says.

What followed was an almost Kafkaesque series of court proceedings and therapy sessions in Cook County, Illinois, in which Cooper’s ex-husband, lawyers, therapists, and other individuals and institutions supposedly concerned with her daughter’s best interests worked to erode Cooper’s most basic parenting rights.

Cooper, 44, shared her story with the Independent Women’s Forum as part of a new documentary series called “Identity Crisis.” The videos tell the stories of four mothers whose daughters fell prey to gender ideology, two detransitioners who now warn of the harms of socially and medically transitioning, and one mental health professional who rails against her profession for prioritizing political correctness over public health.

Since her daughter declared that she is transgender, Cooper says she has seen her for a total of only eight and a half hours. (She counts.)

Cooper lives less than 10 minutes away from her ex-husband’s house, where her daughter now resides, but she isn’t allowed to visit. The only way Cooper can communicate with her daughter is by U.S. mail.

All because she insists that her daughter is a girl.

“People who are imprisoned have more communication with their child than I do,” Cooper says. “That’s wrong.”

Cooper packed photos and other items that reminded her of her previous life with her daughter into cardboard boxes. Looking at them became too hard. For three years, she didn’t talk about what happened.

But finally ready to tell her story, Cooper is warning parents how gender ideology has become the latest weapon in parental custody battles, severing one of the most fundamental bonds in life under the guise of protecting children.

In America, cases in which parents lose custody of their children due to a refusal to support a child’s desire to transition socially or medically may be rare. But the number of transgender-identifying youth has nearly doubled in recent years, leaving politicians, educators, medical professionals, and the public at odds over what policies are best suited to protect the health and well-being of children.

Cooper, a doctoral candidate in education at DePaul University, says she has trouble making sense of the allegation that her daughter is “unsafe” in her presence. But after her daughter made that claim, Cooper understood that the court needed to investigate.

The seven-month investigation, conducted by a licensed clinical psychologist, required psychological testing, home visits, and hours of interviews with each parent. On the bright side, Cooper says, she believed it would clear her of any wrongdoing and reunite her with her daughter.

“After that report came out, I thought, surely, this is going to resolve itself. Clearly, there is no finding of abuse or neglect,” Cooper says. “But the thing that I clearly am not complying with is this concept that good parenting means that you affirm a child’s claim that there is something wrong with their body. I’m not willing to do that. I don’t think that’s good parenting.”

Cooper isn’t able to share the report’s findings, but publicly available court documents after the investigation make no mention of abuse or neglect. Instead, the documents cite Cooper’s need to “further [her] understanding of an[d] support of the minor child as relates to the minor child’s gender dysphoria.”

Cooper says she does have an understanding of the concept of a transgender identity. But it’s not the same understanding or concept that the court wants her to have.

Last year, with her visitation rights still suspended, Cooper voluntarily entered into a new parenting agreement to avoid a prolonged hearing that she feared would cause more trauma and end with the same result.

Under the terms of the final agreement, Cooper’s daughter is to remain in her father’s custody, with no visitation rights for Cooper without a court order or unless her ex-husband agrees.

After consulting with a therapist and attending three support group sessions for parents or guardians of transgender-identifying children, the agreement allows Cooper to petition the court to see her daughter again. She attended those sessions last fall, the soonest she could enroll.

But the specified therapist has no openings because her waitlist is full.

Cooper has missed her daughter’s 13th, 14th, and 15th birthdays. As her 16th birthday approaches in August, Cooper found out that her daughter is learning how to drive.

“I wish I could teach her,” Cooper says. “I think I’m kind of good at that.”

https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/07/26/how-gender-ideology-cost-a-chicago-mother-custody-of-her-child

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

*****************************************