Have you ever looked at abstract art and thought to yourself, "This just looks stupid. Why do people pay big money for stuff that looks like a kid tripping on acid painted it? I must be some redneck, because I just don't 'get it'"

Well... There's a reason for that.

Back in the early days of the CIA, they conducted this psyops program to promote abstract art as a way to show the Soviets that Capitalists were more culturally diverse and had more freedom of expression than the Communist system, and to rub it in worse they used some of the most ridiculous paintings the world had ever seen.

Jackson Pollock was one of the most glaring examples. He was this drunk, bi-polar guy, you may have heard of him, who made paintings, by laying the canvas in the floor and by dancing around, slinging or dripping house paint on them until I guess he felt it was "right."

Well, all that was fine and well until nobody bought his paintings. Most people thought that they were just what they were. Some goofy dude slinging paint at the wall.

Along comes the CIA... "The Soviets think we are culturally backward and aren't creative, we'll show them!" So they set up these shill organizations of high falutin' wine drinkers and used TAXPAYER MONEY to put on these "art exhibits" and then have shill buyers using your money, pay crazy amounts for these artist's work, driving up prices and generating an artificial market where sheep follow along and think that if some rich guy is paying crazy money for this stuff then I need to too, and even though I don't "get it" I should act like I do so all my rich friends won't think I'm uncultured.

And voila... The abstract art market was born and still lives on to this day thanks to the CIA, our money and a bunch of sheep.

More reading if you are interested...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html

Or if you don't want to read and just want to watch...

Its called the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts). It has long been the cover institution for the government getting into the media. Rich folk cocktail parties, drugs, orgies, etc, money given to the heads of media companies and such, deals to avoid taxes and to facilitate production.
You ever notice how easy it is for Hollywood to get onto a military base and make military movies? If I wanted to make a documentary about the boots soldiers wear it would probably take me two years of paperwork just to get into a base to get some B-roll footage of soldiers walking around.

you can't be any more wrong. abstract art was INVENTED by russians (Soviets), in particular Kasimir Malevich in 1915. his "Black Square" was the first. He displayed it in the upper corner of an exhibit, which, in a typical russian house, was reserved for an Eastern Orthodox icon painting. Malevich claimed it started his supremacist movement, but it is foundational for the whole abstract movement.

I never implied in my post we (The United States) invented abstract art. Never made that claim. You may want to re-read the original post.

What I shared were stories that revealed the fact that the CIA helped to popularize it at the cost of the American taxpayer.

This program was/is also used to launder $$$. See Hunter Biden's artwork as an example.

Art in itself is in the eye or pocket of the beholder.

If anything it shows how people want to be a part of something especially if it’s hard or expensive to acquire.

yes, irish, i didn't mean you personally. but the cia business is a crock. abstract art already had been adopted by the elite well before the cia even existed. as for pollack, i was shaky on his work until i saw his no. 52 in person. it is stunningly complex, and held my attention far long than other single painting during a day at metropolitan museum of art, and MOMA.
the elite and a handful of critics generally do determine what becomes big. but some art escapes into the popular consciousness, for good reason, or for bad. i'll take no. 52 over that lifeless, wooden-faced mona lisa any day ...

Looks like paint slung on a wall by a 5 year old to me

That's not what you said in the original reply. You said the Russians invented abstract art. "abstract art was INVENTED by Russians"

Now you're saying that the CIA didn't use taxpayer funds to purchase abstract art and artificially inflate the prices, and they sure did. Do the research.

i stand by my statement that abstract was invented by russians, and already was accepted as valuable before the cia came into existence. the cia tried to influence on the world wide art market with rigged exhibits and inflated prices (think biden boy's art prices) to push america to the forefront of the art world, with the help of rockefeller and MOMA. this effort failed, just like the bay of pigs.
peggy guggenheim made pollack famous before the cia was even founded, by the way ...

also, pollack did not throw paint at a wall. for his drip paintings, he laid canvas out on a floor, and poured and dripped his work. this was painstaking work that took weeks and months.

I was bring facetious about the throwing paint at the wall. I knew he laid the paintings on the floor, although he didn't start that way. I even state that in the original post that you apparently didn't even read thoroughly.

"...who made paintings, by laying the canvas in the floor and by dancing around, slinging or dripping house paint on them until I guess he felt it was "right." - Irishguy

I'm finished responding to you. Sorry...

yes, i missed that. i apologize. i usually read much more closely, and you are right to call me on it. i got a bit rantish because i am passionate about art, especially abstract art. i shouldn't wear my emotions on my t-shirt sleeve.