Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Left Wing Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (2153)	12/28/2000 1:17:45 PM
From: Mao II	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6089

Government funding of the arts in this country, at least prior to 1989, was based on artistic merit. Creation of the arts endowment in the mid-1960s led directly to creation of state and local arts councils across the country. In concert with the Ford Foundation, a network of performing arts organizations emerged all over. Federal, state and local public money was often the key support for innovative arts centers and the audiences and artists they served. There was nothing censorious about this. Does bad art deserve to be funded? Please. However, following the controversies that began in the late 1980s, Congress imposed restrictions on the arts endowment that led to political and moral litmus tests. Federal money should go to art that is "decent," Congress ordered. On top of that, the NEA budget was halved. The cumulative effect of this has been deeply chilling in ways that have still not played out. The private sector has not stepped in to fill the void. And many large foundations, notably the Pew Charitable Trusts, are funding their own agendas. And that leads arts organizations to jettison their own missions in favor of the foundation agenda. The arts suffer. Innovation suffers. The country suffers. M2