The Death of Art; Jewish domination of the Art world; The Artist and the Housepainter; Soros' Art in the Service of Color Revolution

- Peter Myers

Date: October 25 2020; update March 15, 2021.

My comments are shown {thus}; write to me at contact.html.

You are at

Copyright: Peter Myers asserts the right to be identified as the author of the material written by him on this website, being material that is not otherwise attributed to another author.

Two Jewish writers, Israel Shamir and Paul Eisen, have exposed the nihilism of Modern Art and its Jewish agenda.

In A Study of Art, Shamir says that Modern Art is like the Dark Age of Greece. The Death of Art is a sign of civilisational collapse. (item 3}

Paul Eisen's webpage The Artist and the Housepainter is shocking and stunning. (items 1 & 2)

George Soros funded the Soros Center for Contemporary Art, featuring Art in the Service of Color Revolution. (item 4)

Continuing the theme of civilizational collapse introduced by Israel Shamir, Camille Paglia warns that Androgyny is a sign of impending civilizational collapse. This is a conclusion from her book Sexual Personae, a study of Ancient Greece and Rome. (items 5 & 6)

(1) When the media taunt Jeremy Corbyn about mixing with Antisemites, they mean Paul Eisen
(2) Paul Eisen - The Artist and the Housepainter
(3) Israel Shamir attests Jewish domination of the Art world
(4) Soros Centers for Contemporary Art - Art in the Service of Color Revolution
(5) Camilla Paglia says the DNA in our cells remains coded from our biological birth - not possible to Change Sex
(6) Camille Paglia compares Androgyny and the Trans movement in the West to late Greece & Rome, before their Fall

(1) When the media taunt Jeremy Corbyn about mixing with Antisemites, they mean Paul Eisen

by Peter Myers

October 25 2020; update November 2, 2020

Paul Eisen is Jewish; he grew up in Israel. When he discovered the truth about Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, he could not comprehend how the victim of one genocide could become the perpetrator of another. He became Director of Deir Yassin Remembered, to bring that irony to attention.

His friend Gilad Atzmon also grew up in Israel. He was in the Israeli army, and became a world-famous saxophonist. But he concluded that "We (Israelis) are the Nazis and They (Palestinians) are the Jews".

Now both of them are vilified as Antisemites; the Lobby sued Gilad for $$$.

Paul Eisen says, "Three years after the Liberation of Auschwitz, Israel ethnically cleansed the Palestinians".

He became a Holocaust-Denier; because, he says, Auschwitz was used to legitimate Israel's own genocide of Palestinians.

Paul Eisen raises the question: Does one genocide justify another?

One might argue that, if Israel and its neighbours are to make peace, it would be better to forget what Israel did to Palestinians, in order to let the wounds heal. But the same argument would apply to what Germans did to Jews. Is it appropriate to forget one but remember the other?

Jeremy Corbyn had some dealings with Paul Eisen when he was Director of Deir Yassin Remembered. Now the Lobby smears Corbyn as an Antisemite - mainly on account of his past association with Eisen, even though he did know that Eisen was a Holocaust Denier at the time.

When the media taunt Corbyn about mixing with Antisemites, they never mention that Eisen is Jewish. And they never mention that he was only trying to counter Jewish racism.

If Eisen is antisemitic, so is Jimmy Carter, on account of his book Peace Not Apartheid. How can their anti-racist position be tagged as racist? Has our public discourse been hijacked?

Jews are not monolithic. Winston Churchill was right about them: they are in three groups - Communist Jews, Zionist Jews, and National Jews. The Protocols of Zion is wrong on that matter, because it gives the impression that all Jews are in one bloc. Hitler made that mistake too.

The old Left, oriented to the Working Class, has been supplanted by the new Cultural Left, pushing Feminism, the Gay and Trans movements, Open Borders, and other "minority" causes. Such "Cultural Marxism" derives from the Frankfurt School and the Gramscist attack on Western Civilization. This is where the Communist Jews are now. Communist billionaires are not unknown, and are often Jewish.

Althouigh it would seem that Communists and Globalists are poles apart, in fact they have converged. This can be seen in the World Economic Forum's advocacy of the Great Reset, akin to the Green New Deal <>; and in billionaires and transnational companies promoting left-wing cultural policies on Gender and Race.

Both Communists and Globalists advocate Cosmopolitanism and oppose the Nationalism of Trump, Orban, and Putin.

The Communist/Globalist Jews and Zionist Jews operate as cohesive lobbies, as may be observed at JTA and The Forward (Globalist-Left) and (Zionist). In US elections, they are split about 3:1 for Hillary/Biden/Sanders and Trump respectively. Fortunately they counteract one another to some extent.

But the National Jews are more disparate. The saying "Two Jews, three opinions" does not apply to the two lobbies, but it does apply to the National Jews.

If a person of Jewish ethnicity acts as a whistleblower against either of the two Jewish lobbies, without obviously being part of the other one, that person can be deemed a National Jew. An example is Sir Gerald Kaufman, the British Labour MP, who stated that Zionist Jews were using money to sway political outcomes in Britain: Malcolm Fraser, former Prime Minister of Australia, likewise said that the Jewish Lobby has too much power.

I count Gilad Atzmon, Paul Eisen and Israel Shamir as National Jews. They reject both of the lobbies. They play an important role, and I admire their courage.

They get branded as "self-hating" or as "anti-semites" by other Jews, and even by non-Jews. It would be hilarious, except that the consequences can be tough.

Around a century ago, White European Christian powers controlled the world. They lorded it over the rest of the world - the colonies. Jews played a big part in the Decolonisation movement - no doubt enacting what they saw as the Jewish Universalist mission.

When they face Jewish Particularism, some conclude that the proclaimed Jewish Universalism is a sham. Atzmon and Eisen did. What to do then? Distance themselves from it in some way.

When Zionism came on the scene, that Jewish Universalism was put to the test. Israel's demolition of Palestinian houses is a shocking case. Another example: Israel receives the biggest share of US Foreign aid, even though it is a wealthy and powerful country. That aid should be going to poor countries. The mainstream media in the USA, largely Jewish-owned or managed, bury the news of that aid package so that it does not become a political issue. Is that universalist?

I published a booklet by a Holocaust Denier who became a Holocaust Affirmer, Charles D. Provan. The last two pages deal with Eisen and Atzmon. Please read them:

Here is the text of those two pages:

In Clear Sight of Yad Vashem (January 2006)

By Paul Eisen

Over the years, our attention has been drawn to the close proximity of the village of Deir Yassin to the Jewish Holocaust memorial at Yad Vashem. Jews have been encouraged to visit Deir Yassin, the symbolic starting point of nearly six decades of Palestinian dispossession, and from there to look across to Yad Vashem. Palestinians (if only they could!) have also been asked to visit Yad Vashem - the symbol of Jewish suffering - and to look across the valley toward the birth site of their own tragedy.

Everybody was happy. Jews of conscience were of course pleased to see Jewish suffering again at the centre of the discourse but also happy to extend their narrative of suffering to include Palestinians. Palestinians were perhaps less pleased at having - yet again - to acknowledge Jewish suffering in order to help achieve their own liberation, but they recognized the importance of the publicity that the link between Deir Yassin and Yad Vashem brought to their cause.

Of course, one had to be careful. As is so often the case with these things, there was always a but. After all, who in their right mind would compare the massacre of a hundred Palestinians at Deir Yassin with the industrial-scale slaughter of six million Jews? And who would dare draw comparison the 1948 expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians to the near-successful attempt at physically exterminating every last Jewish man, women and child in Europe?

Both atrocities have seen their fair share of deniers over the years. Many Zionists, either with conscious intent or out of ignorance, have denied Deir Yassin. "There was no massacre at Deir Yassin," they say; "It was simply a battle - a battle that the Palestinians lost. These things happen in war and anyway, they did the same to us." Also, "No, the Palestinians were not expelled; they ran away, and anyway, they didn't love the land as we love the land - just look how neglected it was until we came along to make the desert bloom."

[...] But no matter how similar the Jewish and Palestinian histories of suffering may seem, the similarities conceal important differences:

First, by all accounts, and according to any version of the events, what was done to the Jews of Europe took place a long distance from Yad Vashem, while what was done to the Palestinian people took place right there at the village of Deir Yassin and right there throughout the whole of Palestine.

Second, the perpetrators of the atrocity against Jews had nothing to do with Palestine or Palestinians, while perpetrators of the Palestinian tragedy were and are Jews.

Third, the perpetrators of the atrocity against Jews have been roundly condemned over the years and punished for their crimes, and have mostly shown contrition, while the perpetrators of the massacre at Deir Yassin have been honored for their crimes, continue to take pride in them, and live on in their ideology and in their deeds.

Fourth, what befell the Jews had a beginning, a middle, and an end, while the assault on the Palestinians goes on with no end in sight.

And one final difference: If the living evidence for the veracity of the Holocaust narrative is a safe, secure and empowered Jewish people, at home wherever they may be, the living evidence for the veracity of Deir Yassin and the Nakba is a Palestinian people dispossessed and exiled and longing to go home. ==

Paul Eisen on Jewish Suffering, Jewish Victimhood, and Jewish Power

Jewish Power

By Paul Eisen - (August 19, 2004)

Paul Eisen -- Director of Deir Yassin Remembered

The crime against the Palestinian people is being committed by a Jewish state with Jewish soldiers using weapons displaying Jewish religious symbols, and with the full support and complicity of the overwhelming mass of organised Jews worldwide. But to name Jews as responsible for this crime seems impossible to do. [...]

Zionism is not Judaism; Judaism is not Zionism has become an article of faith, endlessly repeated, as is the assertion that Zionism is a secular ideology opposed, for much of its history, by the bulk of religious Jews and even now still opposed by true Torah Jews such as Neturei Karta. But Zionism is now at the heart of Jewish life with religious Jews amongst the most virulent of Zionists [...]

And even if Zionism can still be disentangled from Judaism, can it be distinguished from a broader Jewish identity or Jewishness? [...] Jewishness may be experienced a long way from synagogue, yeshiva or any other formal aspect of Jewish religious life, yet is often still inextricably bound to Judaism. That is why secular Jews are able to proclaim their secularity every bit as loudly as they proclaim their Jewishness. [...]

Jewish identity, connecting Jews to other Jews, comes from deep within Jewish history. [...] Central to Jewish identity both religious and non-religious is the sense of mission centered on exile and return. [...]

At the heart of this Jewish specialness is Jewish suffering and victimhood. Like the shared history itself, this suffering may, but need not, correspond to reality. Jews have certainly suffered but their suffering remains unexamined and unexplained. The Holocaust, now the paradigm of Jewish suffering, has long ceased to be a piece of history, and is now treated by religious and secular alike, as a piece of theology - a sacred text almost - and therefore beyond scrutiny. And the suffering never ends. No matter how much Jews have suffered they are certainly not suffering now, but for many Jews their history of suffering is not just an unchallengeable past but also a possible future. So, no matter how safe Jews may be, many feel just a hair's-breadth away from Auschwitz. [...]

Jewish notions of specialness, choseness and even supremacism, are fine for a small, wandering people, but, when empowered with a state, an army and F16s become a concern for us all. [...] This Jewish state is built on traditions and modes of thought that have evolved amongst Jews for centuries amongst which are the notions that Jews are special and that their suffering is special. By their own reckoning, Jews are "a nation that dwells alone" it is "us and them" and, in many cases, "us or them". And these tendencies are translated into the modern state of Israel. This is a state that knows no boundaries. It is a state that both believes, and uses as justification for its own aggression, the notion that its very survival is always at stake, so anything is justified to ensure that survival. Israel is a state that manifestly believes that the rules of both law and humanity, applicable to all other states, do not apply to it. Their own worst nightmare

It is a terrible irony that this empowerment of Jews has come to most resemble those empowerments under which Jews have suffered the most. Empowered Christianity, also a marriage of faith and power, enforced its ideology and pursued its dissidents and enemies with no greater fervor than has empowered Judaism. In its zeal and self belief, Zionism has come to resemble the most brutal and relentless of modern ideologies. But unlike the brutal rationality of Stalinism, willing to sacrifice millions for political and economic revolution, this Jewish ideology, in its zealotry and irrationality, resembles more the National Socialism which condemned millions for the attainment of a nonsensical racial and ethnic supremacy. [...] ==

The Kingmaker

by Gilad Atzmon

August 18, 2015

Paul Eisen, until a week ago anonymous as far as most Brits were concerned, is now a kingmaker. The UK Jewish Lobby is convinced, for some reason, that the nature of Eisen's relationship with Labour's leading candidate Jeremy Corbyn will determine the future of this country.

As we witness the most important political debate in Britain for generations being hijacked by the Zionist media and 'Jewish sensitivities', the time is ripe to ask: who is Paul Eisen?

Eisen has been described by the Jewish press and its acolytes as an 'anti Semite' and a 'holocaust denier', but peculiarly, no one mentions that Eisen is actually a Jew who sometimes even speaks 'as a Jew'. [...]

Eisen was tormented (as a Jew) to find out that the Israeli Holocaust museum Yad Vashem was erected on the lands of Ayn Karim, a ethnically cleansed Palestinian village. Eisen was tortured when he realised that Yad Vashem was built in proximity to Deir Yassin, a Palestinian village that was erased along with its inhabitants in a colossal coldblooded massacre by Jewish paramilitaries in 1948.

Just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz, the newly born Jewish state wiped out a civilization in Palestine in the name of a racist Jewish nationalist ideology. It is this vile cynicism that turned Eisen into a denier ­ a denier of the primacy of Jewish suffering. In his eyes, if the Jews could commit the massacre in Deir Yassin after Auschwitz, the holocaust must be denied because it failed to mature into a universal ethical message. ==

The Holocaust Industry

Norman G. Finkelstein

Indeed, the Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a 'victim' state, and the most successful ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired a 'victim' status. Considerable benefits accrue to this specious victimhood ­ in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified. (p. 3).

(2) Paul Eisen - The Artist and the Housepainter

Paul Eisen had a website that he later had to take down. But I saved some of it, dealing with Art. Beware: this is shocking and stunning.

He compared Hitler's paintings (of his younger years, when he was still a Christian) with those of a Jewish artist, Hermann Nitsch. Hitler, in those pre-Nazi years, painted natural scenes and Christian themes, eg.

"Mother Mary with the Holy Child Jesus Christ",
"Bathing in a Mountain Lake",
"Mountain scene with wayside cross", and
"Karls-Church, Vienna".

Nitsch painted obscenities and blasphemous themes, e.g.

"Naked girl, resting in the bloody guts of a butchered sow",
"Jesus, crucified together with a butchered pig",
"Girl, together with a butchered pig under a cross", and
"Jesus under bleeding pig".

Eisen noted:

'Adolf Hitler is called the Austrian "house painter", not painter or artist. Hermann Nitsch on the other hand is praised as being one of the greatest Austrian artists ever lived. On August 10, 1998 he concluded one of his most successful open air exhibitions of "modern art", lasting for one week.

'Nitsch was cheered by the Austrian Chancellor, Ministers and other Government officials. All politically correct Parties in Austria were in praise of the "unique artwork" of Hermann Nitsch. This genius is sponsored with millions of Euros by the Austrian government in order to secure the on-going production of his works.

'The Austrian government and the media believe that Nitsch can uplift one's spirit by his "touching creations" - naked girls, resting in the bloody guts of butchered sows. On the other hand an individual will go to prison for up to 15 years in Austria if he possesses and shows or exhibits a piece of an Adolf Hitler painting."' [...]

'Whose works do you want your children to see? Nitsch's "arts" or Hitlers "ugly scribbles"?' ==

I have restored the original webpage, with the photos, to Eisen-artist-&-housepainter.html.

The pdf version is at Eisen-artist-housepainter.pdf; OR (copy & paste the link) .

Here is Eisen's original webpage, without the photos. The links may be dead:

Thursday, 26 December 2013

The artist and the house painter

TWO AUSTRIANS An "artist" and a "house painter"

The Austrian government and the media believe that Nitsch can uplift one's spirit by his "touching creations" - naked girls, resting in the bloody guts of butchered sows. On the other hand an individual will go to prison for up to 15 years in Austria if he possesses and shows or exhibits a piece of an Adolf Hitler painting.

"Naked girl, resting in the bloody guts of a butchered sow". - Nitsch 1998

Adolf Hitler: "Mother Mary with the Holy Child Jesus Christ", Oil/canvas, 1913

The portrayal of a woman by Adolf Hitler and how Nitsch portrays women

Adolf Hitler, "Bathing in a Mountain Lake", 1933, Art in the Third Reich

Hermann Nitsch, "Girl, together with a butchered pig under a cross", 1998

Hitler's view of nature and Jesus and how Nitsch worships Jesus Adolf Hitler, "Mountain scene with wayside cross", 1923 - 1925

Hermann Nitsch, "Jesus under bleeding pig", 1998

Hitler's portrayal of Christian architecture and how Nitsch portrays Christianity Adolf Hitler, "Karls-Church, Vienna", Aquarell, 1912

Hermann Nitsch, "Jesus, crucified together with a butchered pig", 1998 Adolf Hitler, the "house painter" Hermann Nitsch, the "artist"

Adolf Hitler is called the Austrian "house painter", not painter or artist. Hermann Nitsch on the other hand is praised as being one of the greatest Austrian artists ever lived. On August 10, 1998 he concluded one of his most successful open air exhibitions of "modern art", lasting for one week.

Nitsch was cheered by the Austrian Chancellor, Ministers and other Government officials. All politically correct Parties in Austria were in praise of the "unique artwork" of Hermann Nitsch. This genius is sponsored with millions of Euros by the Austrian government in order to secure the on-going production of his works. The Austrian government and the media believe that Nitsch can uplift one's spirit by his "touching creations" - naked girls, resting in the bloody guts of butchered sows. On the other hand an individual will go to prison for up to 15 years in Austria if he possesses and shows or exhibits a piece of an Adolf Hitler painting.

This is an example of our democratic right of freedom of artistic expression and ideas. We are thankful that we can enjoy the outstanding works of Nitsch and are spared the horrors of Adolf Hitler's ugly scribbles. Thank God, democracy selects what we are allowed to see and what we are allowed to read and say.

Who's works do you want your children to see? Nitsch's "arts" or Hitlers "ugly scribbles"?
{end Eisen webpage}

It may be objected that, in his NAZI years, Hitler turned against Christianity, seeing it as a stalking-horse for Judaism. In his Table Talk, a record of conversations from 1941 to 1944, Hitler comes across as an atheist, far from the young Hitler of the religious paintings.

Nevertheless, the comparison with Nitsch remains; and the penalty for possession of those early Hitler paintings remains.

Wikipedia has a webpage on Hitler's paintings at

It notes that "Samuel Morgenstern, an Austrian businessman and a business partner of the young Hitler in his Vienna period, bought many of the young Hitler's paintings. ... Morgenstern kept a database of his clientele, through which it was possible to locate the buyers of young Hitler's paintings. It was found that the majority of the buyers were Jewish."

"This page was last edited on 20 October 2020, at 22:22 (UTC)."

(3) Israel Shamir attests Jewish domination of the Art world

Israel Shamir's article A Study of Art, which exposes that Jewish dominance and its nihilistic agenda, was first published in 2003, in his Yahoo Group at It's now at

He also published an article by Dr Lasha Darkmoon, titled The Plot Against Art, at

That's on his old website; his new site is ==

A Study of Art

by Israel Shamir

Wandering on the great peninsula of Peloponnese I drove into the medieval-looking town of Nauplio. Its harbour is guarded by a grey-walled islet, cosy cafes line up the waterfront, while behind them, narrow and curvy lanes rapidly climb up the steep mount, crowned by a Venetian fort. City streets are fresh and dainty, and preserve the proverbial charm of Greece. There are not many places on the Greek mainland that so effortlessly captivate a stranger. ...

It is a good base to scout the plain of Argolis. On its main square, there is an old Venetian building. It houses now the local archaeological museum. Its collection starts with the great Mycenaean civilisation, a child of Minoan civilisation of Crete. This art blossomed not far away, in the walled cities of Mycenae and Tiryns, once ruled by the accursed Atreid kings. It is a period of wonderful free and inspired art, with voluptuous (like Baroque nymphs crowding the ceiling of my hotel room) figurines of goddesses, jolly octopuses (octopi for Jennifer) on the jars, and frescoes reminiscent of Palestinian work in Deir el-Balach. Mycenaeans could read and write, built castles and palaces, carved the magnificent lions above the gate of their capital. But as one continues the tour, all of a sudden one witnesses the great collapse. Art disappears, and its place is taken over by bare geometric forms. Centuries will pass ­ from 12 c BC to 6 c BC, until local inhabitants will regain the developed forms of art, knowledge of writing and sophistication of old.

One feels this lacuna of time while reading Odyssey. Homer composed his anachronistic masterpiece some four hundred years after the collapse, and he did not know that his heroes could write and read, and their princesses did not have to do laundry by themselves. After the collapse, one finds pieces of art strangely similar to our modern creations. In the small museum of Acropolis in Athens, there is a precise copy of Giacometti statuette, made some 2700 years ago. Geometric forms of that period are reproduced now as best examples of modern art. Thus, in the small museum of Nauplio, I found a missing piece to fit into the puzzle. Death of Art is a symptom of civilisation collapse.

For another piece of the puzzle, I travelled to the other end of Europe, to the Basque capital Bilbao, where the great Jewish American family of Guggenheim built a huge museum of modern art. It is probably the biggest building erected in modern Spain, looking like a flagman of the merchant fleet entering the shore of Biscay. Its forms are unique, there are no right angles, and curves are too complicated and defy easy definition. It is a building that intends to impress and it impresses you as a spacecraft on the village street.

Inside, it is less imposing. Some pieces of corrugated iron, video screens, bare geometric forms are being offered as the chef-d'ouvres of the modern art. A New York artist brought here fifteen ton of rusty iron plates, a Japanese artist has a big room where dozens of TV screens show endless emptiness. Four large floors of nothing are surmounted by the fifth floor, displaying the collection of Armani suits. Every piece could be easily interchanged for another one. There is no 'Rafael of rusty iron', an artist as creator of art disappeared and gave place to the museum curator, the collection owner. It is he who decides what sort of junk will be displayed, whose name will be written under the photo of tinned soup or a dead rat. Only Armani brand reigns supreme, impervious to curator's will, or perhaps it is the curator's ideal art.

The museum of Modern Art in Bilbao was supposed to contain Gernica, Picasso's modern version of the Last Judgement. Instead, it is stuffed with corrugated iron. It is a good place to contemplate the present decay, nay, demise of the European visual art. As good as any, for the example set by Guggenheim is followed everywhere. In Biennale of Venice, Belgians exhibit a row of chairs, Japanese ­ two hundred yards of photo of a cell, Israelis ­ bookshelves with yesteryear cheap books, English ­ trashed old cars. On my way through Milan, I passed by a lorry carrying a dozen of flattened car wrecks to the scrap yard. It could make a good object of art for Biennale, as well as a heap of garbage. I am sure nobody would find it out of place if it would be provided with a name of artist, his country and his media.

In Amsterdam museum I saw a collection of rotten decomposed pig trunks. Newspapers wrote that a certain trunk immersed in formaldehyde took fancy of an American private collector and was sold for fifty thousand dollars. It became a piece of art by decision of two Mammonites, the curator and the collector. In St Nicolas Church of Copenhagen, instead of inspirational images of Madonna (banned from the church by the good Protestants) I saw huge full colour photograph of naked old and sick woman, next to a door-size print of female genitals, next to a photo of homosexual oral act. A church in Amsterdam had an exhibition of beach snapshots. It carried a double message: the church has to be profaned as well as art, and it achieved their double purpose ­ churches of Amsterdam and Copenhagen stay empty, and their artists produce junk.

How come these nauseating prints or rotten cadavers or cheap porn are considered a form of art? The Modern Art predecessors, Gustave Courbet and Edouard Manet, rebelled against Romantic rejection of real life and real Man. The pioneers of Modern Art, Marcel Duchamp and Kazimir Malevich, intended to épater le bourgeois, to extend the borders of art, to show limitless spirit of Man. But their paradoxical joke 'everything placed in a museum is art' was taken with dead seriousness and accepted for truth.

It was a good principle for Guggenheims, this great family that established Modern Art museums in New York, Bilbao, Venice. They had enough money to build a museum, they knew what they liked, and they did not mind to become the supreme arbiter. Guggenheim became the brand name in art. Whatever they proclaimed as art, was art. In the beginning, these were works of some dubious value like 'abstract painting' of Jackson Pollock, and eventually we came to rotten swine, corrugated iron and Armani suits. Art was destroyed.


A day drive from Bilbao, in the old royal city of Leon, one sees the masterpiece of stained glass in the Cathedral, one of the oldest and most wonderful in Europe. Churches and temples were the first and most important depositories of art, and art was produced for them. They were not 'customers' in a way a modern bank orders a painting from an artist. Visual art is inherently connected to temples and churches, it is a form of exquisite worship, proclaiming affinity of God and Man. The walls of Kremlin churches are covered with medieval Russian icons; in churches of Italy one finds a Caravaggio or Rafael painting, divinely human faces of Buddhist images shine from the niches in Pagan and Kyoto temples. Perfect marble bodies of Aphrodite, serene faces of the Virgin, severe images of Christ, gracious forms of Buddha in Theravada temples were the prevailing form of pre-modern art.

The artists are still inspired by God, and still ready to build cathedrals and fill them with painting proclaiming our love of God. The Starry Night of van Gogh could be an altar-piece, Gauguin painted but Nativity and Paradise in Tahiti; and the Dove of Picasso is the one that John the Baptist saw on the banks of Jordan River. Gaudi spent years of his life to create the uncompleted Barcelona Cathedral, while on the other end of Europe, in the one-thousand-years-old first capital of Russian civilisation, Kiev, the unique St Vladimir Cathedral was built and decorated. Outside, this cathedral is quite an ordinary church in Byzantine tradition, but inside it is a miracle. All the walls and ceilings of the church are decorated with frescoes by the great painters of the fin-de-ciecle, Surikov, Nesterov, Vrubel. It is the Sistine Chapel of the Eastern Christendom, and it is almost contemporary with Malevich.

The Russian painters used the traditional scheme and subjects of Orthodox church decoration, but their manner of painting was new, strong, fresh. Who knows, if the Soviet revolution of 1917 would not be so brutally anti-Christian, the great fire of Christendom could be lit again by the Russians. It did not happen, and the Russian churches were destroyed, turned into warehouses, or ­ in case of St Vladimir Cathedral ­ into a Museum of Atheism. But the spirit did not die so easily, and the noble and inspired Pilots and Sportsmen of Deineka, a Russian Soviet painter of 1930s, and of his Nordic contemporaries, proclaimed divinity of Man created in God's Image. Nowadays it is contemptuously called the Totalitarian Art, though Stalin and Voroshilov by Gerasimov is not more totalitarian than Napoleon by David or Henry the Fourth by Rubens.

There is no totalitarian art, but the totalitarian regime in art, totalitarian domination of single tendency in visual art connected with virtual ban of other tendencies. For Guggenheim curators and for the modern art critics, only their 'art' is acceptable, while figurative art is ostracised.

A leading figure of British art establishment, Ivan Massow, the Chairman of the Institute of Contemporary Arts, rose against this totalitarian trend. In an article in the New Statesman titled It's All Hype, he noted the totalitarian regime established by the closed gang of art curators:

Totalitarian states have an official art, a chosen aesthetic that is authorized and promoted at the cost of other, competing styles. In the Soviet Union, the official art was socialist realism. Working in any other mode was considered - and treated as - an act of subversion. In Britain, too, we have an official art - concept art - and it performs an equally valuable service. It is endorsed by Downing Street, sponsored by big business and selected and exhibited by cultural tsars such as the Tate's Nicholas Serota who dominate the arts scene from their crystal Kremlins. Together, they conspire both to protect their mutual investments and to defend the intellectual currency they've invested in this art.

Massow noticed the damage it causes, for the artists are forced to fit into Procrustean bed of this anti-art:

It seems sad that so many talented young artists, clawing to be noticed for their craft, are forced to ditch their talent and reinvent themselves as creators of video installations, or a machine that produces foam in the middle of a room, in order to be recognized as contemporary artists. In this, if nothing else, the arts establishment is guilty of conspiring to make concept art synonymous with contemporary art.

Thousands of young artists wait in the wings to see whether the taste arbiters will relinquish their exclusive fascination with concept art. It's a crime. We need art lovers to tell artists that they're not obliged to reinvent themselves into creators of piles of crap, or pass their work around like samizdat.

He felt that he is breaking the rules of the game:

By outing this opinion in public, I realize that there will be plenty of people waiting, like Madame Defarge with her knitting needles next to the guillotine, for my head to roll into their laps. The 'arts establishment' (what a weirdly oxymoronic phrase that is) is terrifyingly powerful and, like all centres of power, it is no friend to heterodoxy.

His prediction materialised: immediately after the publication of the article he was sacked and ostracised by the British art establishment led by the Jewish cultural tsar Nicholas Serota, and by the Jewish art collector and advertising magnate, a friend of Pinochet, Thatcher and Conrad Black, Charles Saatchi. His power is unique, and an art critic, Norman Rosenthal of the British Royal Academy suggested that "the Saatchis are probably the most important collectors of modern art in anywhere in the world."[i]


"Does it matter that they are Jewish?", asks the annoyed reader. "So there are a few Jews in the thoroughly anti-Christian, profane, totalitarian world of modern art. So what? They are still a tiny minority". Well, not really.

The large database on Jewish influence in the US, gives following names and numbers (Incidentally, the database uses exclusively Jewish sources):

The Jewish influence in modern art is well attended. By 1973, some estimated that 75-80% of the 2500 core "art market' personnel of the United States - art dealers, art curators, art critics, and art collectors -- were Jewish[ii]. In 2001, according to ARTnews, at least eight of the "Top Ten" US art collectors were Jewish: Debbie and Leon Black, Edythe and Eli Broad, Doris and Donald Fisher, Ronnie and Samuel Heyman, Marie-Josee and Henry R. Kravitz, Evelyn and Leonard Lauder, Jo Carole and Ronald S. Lauder, and Stephen Wynn.

"Today," wrote Gerald Krefetz in 1982, "... Jews enjoy every phase of the art world: as artists, dealers, collectors, critics, curators, consultants, and patrons. In fact, the contemporary art scene has a strong Jewish flavour. In some circles, the wheelers and dealers are referred to as the Jewish mafia since they command power, prestige, and most of all, money."

In 1996, Jewish art historian Eunice Lipton explained that she went into a career of an art historian in order to be in a field dominated by Jews:

"I wanted to be where Jews were -- that is, I wanted a profession that would allow me tacitly to acknowledge my Jewishness through the company I kept."[iii] The field of art history... was filled with Jews. One might even say it was shaped by them[iv].

At the Metropolitan Museum of New York, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger (former publisher of the New York Times) eventually became its chairman. He oversaw an institution in which Jews, says George Goodman, "have enriched every area of the Museum's collections, including pre-Colombian ceramics (Nathan Cummings), African art (Klaus Perls), ancient Mediterranean and Middle Easter Art (Norbert Schimmel), Old Masters Paintings (Lore and Rudolph Heinemann), French decoration arts (Belle and Sol Linsky) modern European Art (Florence May Schoenborn), modern American art (Muriel Kallis Steinberg Newman; Edith and Milton Lowenthal), Indonesian bronzes (Samuel Eilenberg), and South and Southeast Asian Art (Enid Haupt and Lita Hazen, Walter Annenberg's sisters).[v] Throughout the Met too, galleries, rooms, theatres, and gardens are named after Jewish sponsors including Iris and B. Gerald Canter, Helene and Michael David-Weill, Lawrence and Barbara Fleishman, Howard Gilman, Leon Levy, Henry R. Kravis, Janice H. Levin, Carroll and Milton Petrie, Arthur, Mortimer, and Raymond Sacker, Laurence Tisch, and Ruth and Harold Uris. (Among the various Jewish curators at the Museum is Barbara Weinberg, head of American Paintings and Sculpture).

By the 1980s, four of the ten board members that dole out the MacArthur Foundation "genius awards" were also Jewish; two Jews also sat on the board of the Russell Sage Foundation.[vi] The Kaplan Fund has also had an important impact on the art community in divvying out awards. One of J. M. Kaplan's daughters was the Chairman of the New York State Arts Council.[vii] Joan Kaplan Davidson was appointed as chairman of the $34 million New York State Art Council in 1975 despite the fact that she was "not professionally trained in the arts." Her mother, Alice Kaplan, was once president of the American Federation of the Arts.

The Getty Museum, founded by the non-Jewish oil mogul, J. Paul Getty (and with $4 billion of funds, the richest museum on earth) has consistently had Jews at the economic helm. In 1998, after 17 years, Harold Williams left the presidency of the J. Paul Getty Trust. Williams, notes George Goodman, was "raised in a Labor Zionist home in East Los Angeles."[viii]. The new president of the J. Paul Getty Trust is another Jewish administrator, Barry Munitz, formerly the chancellor of both the California State University system and the University of Houston.

The fact that Jews are so dominating in the art world is very rarely publicly acknowledged. It is forbidden -- as always for anyone, anywhere -- to discuss the subject for fear of being branded "anti-Semitic." Typically, as example, an entire 1989 academic volume on the "Sociology of the Arts" fails to mention Jews as sociological entity in the modern art dynamic. There are analyses of art galleries, "artist groups," art patrons, and art audiences, broken down into gender, age, income, occupation, and even "racial and ethnic minorities." We can find that, negligibly, "blacks, Orientals, and persons of Spanish origin constitute about 7% of the art audience," but there is nothing whatsoever about Jews, even their own percentage of that "art audience," let alone how many art galleries they own, museums they direct, and articles they generate about art value.[ix]

Why did it happen? What is the reason of Jewish success in the field of Modern Art? It is not due to great achievements of Jewish artists: they are quite modest, and despite the PR support of Jewish art collectors, curators and critics, they are well within what could be expected for a fifteen-million-strong wealthy community. Interaction of wealthy Jewish collectors and philanthropists with Jewish critics active in the Jewish-owned media provides us with a partial answer.

Still, the Jews were extremely ill equipped for their conquest of Olympus. For many generations, Jews never entered churches and hardly ever saw paintings. They were conditioned to reject image as part of their rejection of idols. In the course of two thousand year long selection process, visual gifs of Jews were not developed, as opposed to abilities to learn, argue and convince honed to perfection in Talmudic environment. Rejection of Christ ­ this main fountain of creativity ­ is even deeper reason. There is no visual art or poetry outside of God, at best, a godless person can imitate art. For this reason, Jews are, as a rule, poor painters and sculptors. (Chagall and Modigliani embraced Christ, and Chagall made the stained glass of Chartres). While their mastery of word and ideology is very high (well above average of 100, at 130), their average visual ability is only 75, extremely low. One can consider it a scientific proof of 'no art without Christ'. Indeed until recently there were no important Jewish painters or sculptors. The Jewish temple was supposedly built by Phoenicians and Greeks, and it had a very few images. Even illumination of medieval Jewish manuscripts was usually done by non-Jewish artists, who made very obvious errors trying to copy Jewish letters.

Jewish success in the Art world is amazing. If the Olympic Sports committee would consist of handicapped persons, and a fair share of sports commentators would be lame, and even some winners of the games would be lame, we would have reason to be astonished. But probably, looking at it carefully we would find that the main Olympic sport is Run in Bags, or chess.

Visually handicapped Jews created a similar anomaly ­ that of non-visual 'conceptual' art. A piece of 'conceptual' art is describable and explainable. It is a narration. Tracey Emin's 'Unmade bed' fully describes the object, while another beauty, Alighiero Boetti's sculpture 'Yearly Lamp', a light bulb that illuminated itself only once every twelve months, is fully described by this description. Preparation of these items places no demand on artistic abilities. They can be done by anybody. Such art is perfectly within Jewish abilities. Moreover, Jews with their good ability to produce ideas and read iconography will surely succeed in it. Thus, the Run in Bags, the kind of sport that began as a new entry into Olympic games, eventually is promoted to the position of an all-important one.

We can easily dismiss demonising talk of 'the Jews who destroy art in order to break Aryan spirit'. Jews bend art to fit their abilities, in order to succeed in this difficult (for them) occupation. Breaking (or not) the Aryan spirit is quite irrelevant for them. While there are wealthy Jews able to buy art and provide for an artist who makes what they like, while there are witty Jews in the media that approve of the art Jews like (one that is easy to tell about), they would create bias in favour of the art they like and understand. But how did they get into this position in the first place? How the lame runners of our example have got their opening into the Olympic committee?

Despite their wealth and media domination, the Jews would not 'make it', but for a few previous developments.

1. Photography and reproduction. Recently I visited an excellent photo exhibition of Hagia Sophia mosaics, made to the highest standard. The photographs are so good that one has to touch it in order to recognise that these are not real mosaics. But for a strange reason, the photocopies do not inspire. One can look at them all day long but the soul is not stirred. And then, one comes across the real thing, and the heart turns to God.

Photography is to painting as pornography to real women. Both create an illusion of real thing, but leave a lingering emptiness. In the long run, the 'real thing' suffers. Pornography undid many happy unions. Reproduction of art conditioned us to view uninspiring beauty. It is difficult to view a painting of Mona Lisa without instinctively comparing it to its endless reproductions. In a way, the modern art was a botched response to reproductions, for an artist needs to attract attention of blasé viewers.

Photography was an important stepping stone to demise of art. Great paintings were reproduced in albums, and caused no great uplifting in the hearts. Purely materialistic vision of the age precluded even to referring to the vast difference between original and copy. Painting lost its uniqueness.

2. Museums. Removal of paintings and sculptures from the churches into museums was fatal for the West. A painting lost its context, it was de-contextualised and de-constructed. Paintings and sculptures of Annunciation and Passion were given into the custody of the new priesthood, the curators and critics. It undermined the living practice of faith: despoiled of their precious art, empty churches did not attract visitors.

De-contextualisation of art was done under cover of not-too-sophisticated sophisms. "God needs no paintings, true faith needs no adornment, art will be safe in museums" etc. As if the organisers of mass confiscation wished to strengthen faith, as if they wished to bring people to the church!... It reminds me the favourite Jewish sentence so frequently used: 'It (whatever you are doing or saying) is undermining the Palestinian cause', as if they wished to help Palestinians.

In France, churches lost its riches in the beginning of the 20th century, and since that time both faith and art (after a short splash) went downhill. Need to 'protect art from thieves' was frequently used as a pretext for undermining it. It was similar to locking princess away in a Maiden Tower of so many legends. The Tower protected her, to be sure, but it turned her into an old spinster.

The chef d'oevres of the human spirit were removed from the churches to museum, - to jail. People go and visit the jailed dear friend for a while, and it brings profit to jailers, while the churches brought no profit; but eventually they forget the jailed man, and it is even more profitable, for spirit interferes with profit.

3. De-sacralisation of art. It was achieved after removal of art into museums. From this point of view, while Bilbao Guggenheim is quite repulsive, its mother institution is even worse. New York Guggenheim Museum of Modern Art carefully mixes sacral art and junk. Exposition is done in a way saying: they are the same. Sacred images of Brazilian Virgins are placed next to rude idols, or to erotica. Indeed, pictures of Christ and His Mother are plentiful in the modern art. But as a rule, they are aimed to profane their image. Made of faeces, or presented in indecent poses, they are part of the war on art and Christ. A photograph of crucifix in a container of urine, entitled Piss Christ was exhibited in the Whitney Museum which is headed by a great friend of Ariel Sharon, a member of Mega, Leonard Lauder. Recently I saw in Stockholm an image of Christ presented as the poster for the week (or was it the month?) of gay pride: a crucified black man was erotically embraced by a white muscular Nordic man. He even placed the inside of his leg on the crucified man's body.

If one wants to shock people one can follow the example of a small Russian city that placed the icon of Christ on its coat of arms. All Moscow-based American correspondents visited the dashing rebels and asked them whether they are not afraid of Jews. Probably that is the only 'sacrilege' that still has some shocking value. Alternatively, one can envisage a model of the Wailing Wall with urinals in public toilet.

It is impossible to rule whether the Jewish participation (surely very active) in the processes of de-uniquisation, de-contextualisation and de-sacralisation of art was decisive. Consider a city with a big oil company which supplied the citizens with oil. There was also a tiny kerosene shop that provided a few diehards with the stuff in an old-fashioned way. It was impossible even to compare the two companies. But eventually the big company was streamlined, broken to pieces 'to enliven competition' ­ surely in the best interests of the customers, - forced to tender some of its operations, and was undermined. The tiny kerosene shop received the same status as the once great corporation, and when the corporation's plant was burned down, it rose to unexpected greatness. Was it achieved by the kerosene sellers, or did they enjoy the windfall?

Now we come to a stumbling block of 'conspiracy'. Can one believe that the Jews, ordinary Cohens and Levys, actually conspired to remove art from churches, develop photography and place sacred images in juxtaposition with profane things in order to kill art and the European civilisation? Should we consider a possibility of Jewish conspiracy against art as a part of the warfare against spirit?

In order to unravel this mystery we shall introduce a concept of a Group Interest. Groups (classes and nations) have interests which do not coincide with the sum of interests of its individual members. Moreover, individual members are not always aware of this Group Interest. Let us consider Mammon ­ personification of capitalist Class Interest. A capitalist may wish to sell drinking water, but Mammon wants to poison all water in order to force everybody to buy drinking water. A capitalist may build the mall, Mammon wants to destroy the world outside the mall, for the outside world interferes with the only meaningful occupation, shopping. While a separate capitalist can do a lot of damage, his Class Interest, Mammon, is more dangerous, nay ruinous for the world. Mammon will try to eliminate every distraction to shopping, be it churches, art, forests, rivers, seaside, fresh air, mountains. An individual capitalist probably is not aware that he follows his Class Interest when he dumps chemical poison waste into a river.

For Mammonites, Art is a distraction from the most important occupation, adoration of Mammon. Mammonite reviews of Art concentrate on price of Art. Recent discussion of a possible fate of the Pink Madonna by Raphael in the NY Times and in the Guardian was limited to the price tag and ownership. A modern Russian writer Victor Pelevin described[x] an exhibition of receipts, where the masterpieces are left in crates in the storehouse, while the walls of the exhibition hall are adorned by an art dealer-issued documents asserting that the painting was bought by the private collector for, say, 15 million dollars. It is the most advanced tendency in design, monetarist minimalism, says a character in the novel. Indeed, judging by many art reviews, such an exhibition would do nicely, as it keeps the most relevant items, price tag and ownership of the piece of art.

For Mammonites, every art exhibition is a monetarist minimalist exhibition, as they notice only the bottom line - price tag. Mother of a Jewish American Princess is supposed to meet her potential son-in-law wearing mink replete with price tag, says a cruel Jewish joke. In the modern art, mink is removed, but the tag is preserved. Thus the Capitalist Class Interest supports Conceptual Art; moreover, it turns every kind of art into Conceptual art.

For Jews, their Group Interest lays in undermining visual art for they can't compete in it. Even deeper group interest of Jews is to undermine Christianity, their main enemy. We see this interest satisfied now by relentless attack on Mel Gibson who dared to produce a film about Christ. Not about Jesus ­ a kind Jewish Rabbi, neither about whoring Jeshu from jolly Nazareth ­ but about God Who Died on the Cross. As sacrality in Europe is unavoidably Christian, profanation of art is certainly within Jewish Group Interests. It does not mean the Jews, or even some Jews understand that they act in their own group interests.

However, they did it before, as well, for the Eastern Christianity experienced a similar development twelve hundred years ago. The Jews were prominent in the great tragedy of Byzantine art, the iconoclasm. In the beautiful and spacious Church of Hagia Sophia, the arguably greatest achievement of the Eastern Orthodox Christianity, lovingly restored in 20th century by Turkish masters, in vain one seeks mosaics of Justinian and Theodora copied at Ravenna. One finds only relatively late mosaics and frescoes. Everywhere, with a very few exclusions, the sacred images of that fruitful period were destroyed, when the rejection of images became the official doctrine of the Empire. They survived in far away places: in St Catherine of Mt Sinai, in remote monasteries, to haunt us with their sublime beauty and with feeling of irreparable loss. The contemporary writers leave us no doubt: Jews (a powerful community in these days as nowadays) were extremely active in promoting this concept.

However, this comparison brings some hope, for after two hundred years of iconoclasm, people got tired of boring non-spiritual churches, and brought the visual art back. Until now, the Church celebrates Sunday of Orthodoxy, when the Art Came Back. We also can do it. The sacred images should be returned to their rightful place, in the church. All of them, the delightful Annunciation by van Eyck from Washington Museum, and Trinity by Rublev in Moscow Museum of Old Russian Art, should be re-contextualised. We should not be cruel to collectors: in my opinion, Saatchi may keep all formaldehyde swine he likes.

And while at it, other cultural properties should be re-contextualised as well. Let us return the mosaics of Pompeii to their place from the boring museum of Naples, and the Greek marbles to Athens, let the treasures of Mesopotamia go back to Iraq, and the statues of Hisham Palace back to Jericho. Let us empty the Grand Louvre and fill small French towns with art. It will repair the broken fabric of spirit. Art objects can't be owned by private persons, they are our connection to Divine. Restoration is possible: during last few years Russia restored vast amount of churches, and precious icons were returned to them. In Old Ladoga, an old Russian town, (70 miles from St Petersburg), restored churches of 12th century shine again on the bank of Volchov River after years of neglect. With gruesome complaints the Russian museums give up church properties swallowed in 1920s. The West can do the same: there will be thousands of visitors in the churches after their art pieces will be restored to them, the fountain of faith will supply us with endless creativity, and the Aberration will be over.

[i] FALLON, p. 335 This and following data is quoted by the great compendium of Jewish activities, with much gratitude.
[ii] BURNHAM, p. 25.
[iii] RUBIN- DURSKY, p. 289
[iv] LIPTON, p. 285
[v] GOODMAN, #2, p. 73
[vi] CHRISTOPHER, p. 121
[vii] KREFETZ, p. 153
[viii] GOODMAN, #2, p. 142
[ix] FOSTER/BLAU, 1989
[x] Pelevin, Babylon, Faber and Faber 1999.

(4) Soros Centers for Contemporary Art - Art in the Service of Color Revolution

First, watch the video at


The Influencing Machine - An exhibition about the legacy of the Soros Center for Contemporary Art

curated by Aaron Moulton

March 14 - April 27, 2019

Galeria Nicodim, Bucharest

Strada B_icule_ti, nr. 29 013 193 Bucharest, Sector 1

+40 751 150 705

Luchezar Boyadjiev, Nina Czegledy, Ole Dammegård, Aleksandra Domanovi_, Constant Dullaart, Harun Farocki, Jakup Ferri, Andrea Fraser, Adrian Ghenie, Ferenc Gróf, Naomi Hennig, Mi Kafchin, Jon McNaughton, Yerbossyn Meldibekov, Suzanne Meszoly, Mike Z Morrell, Ciprian Mure_an, Lucia Nimcova, Oksana Pasaiko, REP Group, Joanne Richardson, _erban Savu, Keiko Sei, Sean Snyder, SOSka Group, János Sugár, Andrei Ujic_, Anetta Mona Chi_a & Lucia Tká_ová, Gulnara Kasmalieva & Muratbek Djumaliev

Inspired by a True Story: What was the Network of Networks?

Thirty years ago as the Soviet Union collapsed, the Open Society Institute, an unprecedented civil society initiative created by philanthropic activist George Soros, stepped in to facilitate vulnerable transition in most major cities throughout Eastern Europe and Central Asia. 1 This non-governmental organization helped to implement a wide variety of neoliberal educational initiatives in areas such as public health and independent media that accelerated the path towards democracy and free-market thinking - ideals that were often incompatible with the previous system. One of the prolific ways this was done was by ushering in the most avant-garde program of contemporary art in human history in the form of the Soros Centers for Contemporary Art (SCCA), established in twenty major cities 1 across the former bloc.

1 Almaty, Belgrade, Bratislava, Bucharest, Budapest, Chisinau, Kiev, Ljubljana, Moscow, Odessa, Prague, Riga, Sarajevo, Skopje, Sofia, St. Petersburg, Tallinn, Warsaw, Vilnius, Zagreb.

Arriving with a pedagogical evangelism for Western-style cultural production, the SCCA networks had operating budgets that asymmetrically dwarfed the pre-existing Artist Unions or state budgets for art.2 A new and superior art world appeared overnight. The centers set up a collaborative network within each major city and across the network as a whole: providing grant money, facilities, know-how, publishing, research databases of local artists for foreign curators and also infrastructure to cultivate off-shooting branches, events, education programs, etc. In places like Chisinau, Moldova the SCCA is credited with introducing the very idea of contemporary art as they would come to know it. The change has often been referred to as a "necessary upgrade" by former SCCA Chisinau director Octavian Esanu, who goes on to say it was "something happening across the newly independent states like what the IMF was doing for these same economies." The result was in fact radically transformative.

In addition to pioneering the internet in the form of hands-on education and first-time access, the OSI also, in certain cases, laid the fibre optic cables and created the satellite networks for the fastest public internets in the world.4 An entire ecology of media resources from OSI-funded TV stations, radio, newspapers and magazines were at the SCCA's disposal to communicate the message, experiment with the medium, and have an unprecedented and hopefully irreversible reach of communication in places where the democratic voice of the people had historically been easily suppressed. Their presence reinvented hierarchies of quality and schools of thought through the institutionalization of culture. They invented the notion of the "cultural manager" and influenced the rise in curatorial practice as a watchdog in the field.

Depending on the location, the SCCA program had a 5-10 year shelf-life. The latter years were referred to as the "Sunset Years" where as quickly and suddenly as they had come, they would exit. The network would downsize the budget annually with the notion that the centers would stand on their own through the knowledge and infrastructure they had acquired. And by then, a new generation of philanthropist would hopefully step in to take responsibility. The SCCA Zagreb or the SCCA Ljubljana, for example, successfully transitioned into independent operations and prospered to become the leading institutions of their art worlds. For others that was not the case. They shut down in slow motion, a shadow of their bombastic beginning. Art worlds would remain problematically divided in their wake. And now the SCCA's histories are fast disappearing just like those they had stepped in to save.

What is The Influencing Machine?

The exhibition at Galeria Nicodim is as much about influence as it is an experiment in influencing. It is inspired by the SCCA network and reflects on the legacy anthropologically, turning the SCCA's method in on itself. It employs a recursive format where form, function, meaning and interpretation are in a closed loop, a self-oiling machine, a meta-SCCA. It analyzes the SCCA's practice of institutionalizing cultural networks and directionalizing cultural production- an invention of new patterns, practices and traditions that would fast become sacred. The exhibition includes iconic works, important themes, case studies, archival material and newly commissioned projects from international artists born out of this period or reflecting on it. The exhibition has five sections that lead the viewer through a spectrum of history, data, and aesthetics.

Section 1: Cultural Exorcism

The Influencing Machine is introduced through archetypal remnants and specters of the fallen regime, the Closed Society in the face of Disaster Capitalism. Videograms of a Revolution (1993) from Harun Farocki and Andrei

2 From the information I found the range across the SCCA during the prime years is from three to ten times the state budget.

3 Octavian Esanu, "Art and Theory of Post-1989 Central and Eastern Europe - A Critical Anthology," Ed. Janevski, MoMA Primary Documents (2018)

4 Jonathan Peizer, "The Dynamics of Technology for Social Change," IUniverse, 2005. Peizer observes that the Institute had "the unique opportunity and responsibility to change the world using new concepts in philanthropy and technology that were tested and deployed thanks to Soros' largess."

Ujica sets the stage with the mythologically televised "People's Revolution" in Bucharest in late December of 1989. Kazahkstani artist Yerbossyn Meldibekov's monumental sculpture Gattamelata (2007) shows the direct-action glory of dethronement. The ousted leader is remembered only with a heraldic pose of taxidermied horse feet, the animal and its rider violently cut at the knee and gone without a trace. Aleksandra Domanovic has produced a new work based on her portrait series of Yugoslavia's beloved Tito as a cipher in states of transition. For the exhibition she has merged her classic image of Tito with the iconic Otpor! Movement of Serbia's "Bulldozer Revolution." A devil in the details becomes history's ironic call-and-answer when we find First Lady Melanija Trump's visage uncannily blurred into Tito's own features. The "Tulip Revolution" in Bishkek is captured on camera and operatically synched with the tempestuous soundtrack of "Hall of the Mountain King" in Gulnara Kasmalieva & Muratbek Djumaliev's frenzied film Revolution (2005), a movie that leaves you hungry for change now at any cost.

Section 2: Conversion Therapy

Art therapy and shock therapy intertwine with works that address a spectrum of Ostalgia, theories on forgetting and transitory aesthetics. Slovakian Lucia Nimcova's hilarious masterpiece Exercise (2008) shows villagers in a reenactment of bodily memory, cathartically remembering the mandated exercising that occurred every morning until everything abruptly changed at the Fall of Communism. Labor and capital have a clear conversion value in Anetta Mona Chi_a & Lucia Tká_ová's piece All Periods in Capital from 2007. The seminal book by Karl Marx has been filtered through the bean counter, each moment of punctuation converted into a small handmade black ball, more than 22,000 sentences of commodified ideology. The exchange rate for contemporary art and its importance to peasants is a dozen eggs or maybe a chicken. SOSka Group's film Barter parodies the values of these cultural markets when they are displaced out of context.

Some of the earliest SCCA Annual Exhibitions had an unprecedented understanding of weaponizing context for holistic purposes in the name of art.5 These actions, unlike any prior in the history of art, were done as a means to not only confront the past but exorcise it. This pattern of exhibitions ritualized a use of sacred heritage sites or suddenly demilitarized spaces in a manner akin to cultural voodoo.

One such example is former SCCA Kiev curator Marta Kuzma's controversial exhibition "Alchemic Surrender" from 1994 which took place on a naval base in the Crimean Sea aboard the live Battleship Slavutych. Consecrating acts of emasculation, transgression, capitulation and desecration gave new meaning to the notion of conversion therapy. Such exhibitions were radical intersections of Cold War ritual, spirituality, protest and cultural metabolization.

Section 3: Pedagogical Evangelism

When a scientific law is combined with the cause it provides predictions. When a scientific law is combined with the effect it provides explanations. In this sense, predictions and explanations are symmetrical and reversible through the logic of deduction. That leaves testing.6

5 Related Exhibitions: "State" Curated by Ivan Runkovskis, SCCA Riga (1994), "Alchemic Surrender" Curated by Marta Kuzma, SCCA Kiev/Crimea (1994), "Carbon Art" Curated by Octavian Esanu, SCCA Chisinau (1995), "Monument" Curated by Helena Demakova, SCCA Riga (1995), "Island" Curated by Slaven Tolj, SCCA Zagreb/Dubrovnik (1996)

6 George Soros,"Fallibility, reflexivity, and the human uncertainty principle," Journal of Economic Methodology (2013), 20:4, 309-329

This portion of The Influencing Machine is inspired by a genre of exhibitions7 from the earliest years across the network, exhibitions that can be credited with bringing the world the clearest and most advanced form of socially engaged practice. In particular is the revolutionary exhibition "Polyphony" from 1993 curated by Suzanne Meszoly, the pioneering architect of the entire SCCA network. Prolifically engaging non-sites across Budapest, artworks appropriated and invented a range of Situationist tactics by hacking all forms of media and communication as well as teaching DIY methodology. An important achievement was that many of these interventions would hopefully slip past the common viewer and not even be seen as art but more as medium as message as disruption. The curatorial statement says it would "offer the artists information on available technological and material possibilities for the production of radically new forms of art." This tactical media savvy could become useful tools in times of need.

The Ukrainian collective REP Group (Revolutionary Experimental Space) was born directly out of the Orange Revolution in Kiev. The energy and theater of change there on the Maidan Square became a stage for multiple performative actions that were political and artistic. Next to professional protestors, a ragtag group of artists came to the frontlines to imagine a new language for Ukrainian art and culture, one born from within and not superimposed. They used the SCCA Kiev like a pressure cooker to evolve a project that was being born in that very moment, transforming daily, an avant-garde of survival. For over a decade REP Group have continued to shape their revolutionary expression through performance, interventions, archiving and neologizing refracted through the problematics of cultural colonialism stemming from initiatives like the SCCA itself. A newly commissioned monumental mural in their Patriotism style as well as a survey of their performative interventions will be on view.

Section 4: Archival Rituals

The complexity of the world in which we live exceeds our capacity to comprehend it. Confronted by a reality of extreme complexity, we are obliged to resort to various methods of simplification: generalizations, dichotomies, metaphors, decision rules, and moral precepts, just to mention a few. These mental constructs take on a (subjective) existence of their own, further complicating the situation.8

The SCCA Archive was the most important and first ritual that consecrated each center: to collect data on the lost histories of the 60s, 70s, and 80s. This paved the way for writing the story as it was happening during that transitional period of the 90s. This selective resource became the exclusive avenue through which foreign curators would gain an understanding of contemporary art in these previously hard-to-access art worlds.

Half of these archives are currently inaccessible, disappeared or destroyed. As the harbinger of the internet with an obsessive archival impulse, today most of the SCCA websites no longer exist or are barely traceable in histories of the internet. In order to preserve these histories, The Influencing Machine uses the same approach the SCCA used to archive its networks of artists. A near complete archive is put forth here to allow a selective but broad view of the network's Curriculum Vitae. It will have a collection of data pertaining to early programming histories including publications, open call announcements, documentation, films, reviews, and press releases that map the network. Focus is given to the anomalously advanced case study exhibitions referenced above that inspired the Conversion Therapy or Pedagogical Evangelism sections of The Influencing Machine.

7 Related Exhibitions: "Nonexistant Art" Curated by Urmas Muru, SCCA Tallinn (1993), "Polyphony" Curated by Suzy Meszoly, SCCA Budapest (1993), "Orbis Fictus" Curated by Ludvík Hlavá_ek and Marta Smolíková, SCCA Prague (1994), "010101" Curated by Calin Dan, SCCA Bucharest (1994), "Geo-Geo" Curated by Janis Borgs, SCCA Riga (1995), "Mundane Language" Curated by Algis Lankelis, SCCA Vilnius (1995), "Pune Ochiul" Curated by Bradley J. Adams, SCCA Chisinau (1997),

8 George Soros, "Fallibility, reflexivity, and the human uncertainty principle," Journal of Economic Methodology (2013), 20:4, 309-329

Section 5: Summoning Soros Realism

Socialist Realism was seen as the subservience of creative expression to aggrandize the dictator or the state's message - a lobbying to control the transcendental aspirations of the nation, of the artist. This was embodied in classical paintings of the Dear Leader or the proud worker in the field. It was the aesthetics and materiality of the Closed Society.

With Globalization and calls for an Open Society, a Good Samaritan came with the geostrategic zeal of a missionary, a mystic merchant offering an alternative form of aspiration to save the common man from subservience. Like a Big Brother, he directed them to the hopeful dreams of Magical Capitalism, a spiritualized alchemy of culture and finance. He worked across these lands to sow his seeds of enlightenment unconcerned with social consequences. He would take measures to assure that no one could have a greater philanthropic impact than him. In his native tongue of Esperanto his name meant "to soar". This man was George Soros.

The final section of the exhibition will be a pantheon of portraits dedicated to this patron saint of the Open Society. These were each commissioned for the exhibition from some of the most important artists working today both in Romania and internationally such as Luchezar Boyadjiev, Adrian Ghenie, Naomi Hennig, Mi Kafchin, Jon McNaughton, and _erban Savu.

Why Tell This Story Now in 2019?

Because it is extremely intriguing. Because it fits neatly in a history between Abstract-Expressionism for the CIA and the Russian trolling of 2016. Because politics and perspectives around this have evolved in unforeseen ways from then to now. Because this isn't about art nor was it ever. Because it's the great Rorschach of our times. Because it is not a simple matter about good or evil even though we're preconditioned to believe it is. Because perception management and consensus control is everything.

Many of these SCCA art worlds, their histories and their influence have faded completely. The narrative has been historicized and controlled predominantly by devotees who were advocating it from within the network. The Influencing Machine offers a chance to think critically about cultural avant-gardes and influence, especially on this scale.

The exhibition is a reflection of cultural practice in a mirror that has never seen itself. It is a celebration of the avant-garde in its most experimental form. It reveals contemporary art as a true battleground for beta-testing radical ideology, where the contemporary artist is an awakened activist, where institutional critique is a form of well-branded lobbying, and where avant-gardes can be scripted. It is a portrayal of perception, network and control.

This is The Influencing Machine.

Special thanks to Assistant Curator Nathalie Agostini who was essential to this project and establishing the archive.


Contact Aaron Moulton


The Influencing Machine Curated by Aaron Moulton Assistant Curator: Nathalie Agostini March 14 - April 27, 2019


Galeria Nicodim Strada B_icule_ti, nr. 29 013 193 Bucharest, Romania


A conversation with important voices from the early period of the SCCA will precede the opening starting at


Participants include: Luchezar Boyadjiev, Calin Dan, Geert Lovink, and Aaron Moulton

Opening Reception: Thursday, March 14, 18:00­22:00pm.


For more information, contact: Strada B_icule_ti, nr. 29 013 193 Bucharest, Sector 1

+40 751 150 705 ==

Comment (Peter M.): One of the most interesting features of this Soros Art is the symbol of the Closed Fist. It was used in Optor to overthrow Milosevic, and later in the Arab Spring. It's also used in Feminist and Trotskyist literature.

Michel Chossudovsky noted its use in the Occupy Wall Street movement. Unlike the Trotskyoid Gatekeeper left which mostly supported the Color Revolutions (eg against Gaddafi and Assad), Chossudovsky always saw the hand of Gene Sharp, NED, Soros and the CIA behind these events. He noted the common symbols, e.g. the clenched fist:

Occupy Wall Street and "The American Autumn": Is It a "Colored Revolution"?

Part I

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, October 13, 2011

(5) Camilla Paglia says the DNA in our cells remains coded from our biological birth - not possible to Change Sex

Paglia: 'Transgender Mania' is a Symptom of West's Cultural Collapse

By Sam Dorman | November 3, 2015 | 11:15 AM EST

( feminist author, social critic and self-described "transgender being" Camille Paglia said in an interview last month that the rise of transgenderism in the West is a symptom of decadence and cultural collapse.

"Nothing... better defines the decadence of the West to the jihadists than our toleration of open homosexuality and this transgender mania now," Paglia said during an October 22 interview on the Brazilian television program Roda Viva. ==

Camille Paglia: "Transgender Mania is a Symptom of Cultural Collapse" (video)

By VC on June 1, 2016

[...] Camille Paglia, an author and academic who never shied away from controversy, breaks down the implications of today's transgender agenda. Although herself a lesbian and a feminist, Paglia has always criticized the artificial and unreasonable constructs made in the name of "equality" and political correctness.

Here are some quotes from the above video.

"Sex reassignment surgery, even today with all of its advances, cannot in fact change anyone's sex."

"Ultimately, every single cell in the human body, the DNA in that cell, remains coded for your biological birth."

"I think that the transgender propagandists make wildly inflated claims about the multiplicity of gender."

In this day and age, stating these kinds of facts is considered wrong and "hurtful". If mass media can turn something as clear and defined as a person's gender into a big, vague, tornado of confusion, it can redefine anything else to fit its needs É and people will fall for it.

(6) Camille Paglia compares Androgyny and the Trans movement in the West to late Greece & Rome, before their Fall

Camille Paglia interview with Claire Fox, at the Battle of Ideas. Published on Nov 4, 2016

Internationally renowned American social critic Camille Paglia has been called 'the anti-feminist feminist'. Describing contemporary feminism as a 'gross betrayal of the radical principles of 1960s counterculture', she stands firmly on the side of free speech and against political correctness.

Camille Paglia sits down with Institute of Ideas director Claire Fox and a full house, to discuss the past, present and future of feminism and the themes in her forthcoming (and seventh) book, Free Women, Free Men: Sex, Gender, Feminism.

In the riveting discussion which ensues, filmed at the Battle of Ideas, Camille describes her thinking as "street smart Amazon feminism".

Asked about consent classes, she says of those who run them "they are vampires, young people must rebel and say get out of our sex lives." Feminism as Claire Fox tells us, certainly gets a good intellectual kicking. A must to watch and share.

39:00 sex-reassignment surgery under the age of 18 is Child Abuse

40:00 the assault on masculinity ... gender doesn't really exist, it's not really polarity, everything is all about expanding Women's rights, but also terminating Men, and defining Men out of existence; masculinity is, by definition, toxic ... I began all my studies, my book Sexual Personae began ... on Androgyny, I've always been attracted to the subject of Androgyny, and that's what Sexual Personae is, exploring the history. The more I explored it, I realized that,

40:48 historically, the movement to Androgyny occurs in late stages of culture, as a civilization is starting to unravel ... you find it again and again and again, through history ...

41:24 and the people who live in such periods, the late days of culture, whether it's the Hellenistic era, whether it's the Roman Empire, .. whether it's Weimar Germany, people who live at such times feel that they're very sophisticated, they're very cosmopolitan, and homosexuality, heterosexuality ... anything goes ... but from the perspective of historical distance, you can see that it's a culture no longer believes in itself, and they what you invariably get are people who are convinced of the power of heroic masculinity, on the edges, whether they're the Vandals and the Huns, or whether they're the barbarians of Isis {Islamic State - ed.}, you see them starting to mass on the outsides of the culture, and that's what we have right now, so there is a tremendous and rather terrifying disconnect between the infatuation with the Transgender movement, in our own culture, and what's going on 'out there'. I'm concerned, I feel it's ominous, I question whether the Transgender choice is genuine in every single case, but what concerns me is when well-meaning adults believe that they're helping people by making easier some permanent change in the body from which there is no going back.


By "out there" she might be referring to China, Japan, South-East Asia and the Islamic world. One day, they might ridicule the West as the place where Men Marry Men and Women Marry Women. We would be a laughingstock. - Peter M.


Copyright: Peter Myers asserts the right to be identified as the author of the material written by him on this website, being material that is not otherwise attributed to another author.


Write to me at contact.html.