All the contradictions in their alliances, and among themselves, has had more impact than some might have thought.

–A number of the top theocrats, or those close to them, have lost their positions in government.

–A conflict has developed among the evangelicals, with global warming and the war fueling a breakaway to the center or even to progressives.

–Huge mobilizations, the immigrant rights people, the Obama insurgency, even the feminists around Hillary, have given greater activist social weight to those against theocracy. In the past, James Dobson wouldn’t have met much challenge on the right. But now even some evangelicals are opposing him.

That’s sketchy and imcomplete for sure, but I think it’s pretty clear than this is not exactly the time for a mass campaign for atheism, if it ever is.

Am not sure how you see the Trotsky connect. So far I think he’s a little of this, a little of that…maybe that’s the connect? But from what I can understand so far, Leon does talk about the creative spirit, and I think he also gets into FAIRLY concrete and less vague reasons why that creative spirit would be further inspired (theoretically) under socialism. Personally I welcome you’re opening up a supposed “hornet’s nest.”

In light of that will take on a sacred cow–not literally cow, but these days pretty much sacred. Frida Kahlo. To me we can learn something from her life, personal struggle, and even political involvement (which was a back and forth) but “artistically” I don’t like her work, neither in form nor content. Think a lot of Goya’s work was more progressive, especially given Ms. Kahlo’s background and the period in which she lived. But what always blew me away was, in her house in Coyoacán, the last canvas she was working on atop her easel, just before she died is a portrait of Stalin. omg–it’s nothing and if you compare it to Picasso’s portrait of JVS, it looks like “paint by numbers.” How ironic that she and Diego were so tight with Leon before he was assassinated.

Even though he later became much more conservative (some would say reactionary) Octavio Paz wrote essays concerning the Mexican muralists (the more famous four–Tamayo, Orozco, Siquieros and Rivera) that is very eye-opening. “Essays on Mexican Art” (Harvest pubs.) In one part he compares Rivera’s murals to Orozco’s–especially during Rivera’s CP days, and how his work became pretty flat and very formulaic; then there’s Orozco, who was not a communist, and whose murals were so strong, wrenching, etc., and how both of them were depicting the same subject matter.

(BTW want to recommend who I think has found a “fine balance” between something new and creative, at the same time more revolutionary–Rupert García, a now older Chicano artist. His more overtly political (and smaller) posters were a great tool in the struggle e.g. around South Africa/against apartheid. BUT it’s his murals and triptychs that are extremely dynamic and jarring– anti-imperialist, anti-Catholicism, but without being the least bit dogmatic. You’re not just an observer but are so drawn into his art, you have an entire experience–and at the risk of letting those hornets run amok, his work is almost an epiphany.

But…I didn’t understand what you said here so if you can, could you explain:

“I say Israel will do it because with Obama as president, if he wins, will most likely allow a M. A. D. doctrine in the Middle East to take effect, a prospect that Israel will be too difficult for their entrenched “right-wing” governments to accept.”

BTW Couple of good editorials in NYT today–about Obama.

In an earlier life, selling truck parts for heavy-duty trucks, one week I had to hit every place having anything to do with trucks in the industrial areas of Dallas, Texas. I was amazed at how many topless joints there were, and how many of them were set up right next to scads of little fundamentalist store-front churches. Perhaps it was simply the price of real estate, but I think there’s a cultural connection as well.

Seems like a worthy task is taking Wilhelm Reich’s treatment of repressed sexuality, patriarchy and social control, from the ‘Mass Psychology of Fascism, and translating it into Farsi. Even better, read it in English ourselves for dealing with our own obsessions and demons.

Andre: “I think you’ve really made me rethink a lot of things… and I really want to agree with you, Linda. I really, truly do. But I just can’t envision such things being possible under the dictatorship of the proletariat (under communism yes).”

I am not exactly sure what you meant about commandist, etc. But coming off of your paragraph above…What do people think artists can (or should be) doing today? “Under socialism, under communism” is a bit speculative, don’t ya think?

I realize that’s not what Stalin and Mao held, and even Lenin, to a lesser degree. That’s another matter. But it’s the way Marx looked at it, and I think it’s fine.