The wealthy and their money and the corporate branding behind both infiltrate any edgy cultural thing that becomes in any way popular and they always have, rega

The wealthy and their money and the corporate branding behind both infiltrate any edgy cultural thing that becomes in any way popular and they always have, regardless of that cultural thing's political leanings and postures.. To a certain extent or at least beyond a certain point, it's just an inevitable dual parasitic symbiosis of convenience that both end up embracing.. I can't think of a world changing artistic and creative movement in the last 130 years that hasn't slid right down this daisy chain. The very phrase "selling out" was born within it.. Most of the great expressionist and abstract painters of the 20th century painted themselves as anticapitalist almost to a fault, it didn't stop their art from being promoted by rich, connected players in the business and philanthropy worlds until it became financial playdough for the status-seeking billionaires of today... How many other artistic movements went down similar paths? Simply being rich is emotionally no substitute for being involved in the rich texture of interesting cultural edges, but if you lack the creativity to start within them, you simply buy your way in, even if everything about your life and activities goes against the very grain of what those creative cultures tacitly aspire to stand for.