I think the article is saying that it's about his politics and theoretical stance rather than wealth. You can be wealthy and popular in the art world. I can't

I think the article is saying that it's about his politics and theoretical stance rather than wealth. You can be wealthy and popular in the art world. I can't speak to this case in particular but there's usually inside knowledge involved in art world assessments. The work might look good but if you've met the artist and he/she is an idiot, or they disdain every living and dead artist you like... Well, it's difficult to sustain a positive critical opinion. That might sound irrational, but I think it's justifiable as a result of the fact that people and human relationships are more complex and important than artifacts.