Of course, this is an idealistic and impractical way of viewing the
Guliania/Helms/etc. agenda for the arts.  The Constitution has no provision
that encourages government financial support for cultural expression.  The
decision to provide such support has been, from the start, a political
initiative (pork barrel in many cases).  It remains political.  Elected
persons always look after their perceived followers/districts in terms of
public works and all other discretionary appropriations of taxpayers' money.


Public funding for "self expression," on the other hand, represents. . .
. the public.  "The public" doesn't mean one group or another --  it
means EVERYONE.  In a society that values freedom of expression, it MUST
mean everyone -- or we surrender to the tyranny of the majority --
exactly what the 1st amendment seeks admirably to avoid.  You cannot
separate the intent of the 1st Amendment from the responsibility that
public funding has when it supports the expression of ideas -- they are
inextricably linked and mutually dependent.  If it is protected by the
1st amendment and does not break any existing laws, then it is, defacto,
decent, no matter how "indecent" it may be.  Giuliani (and most
politicians who are conservative on this issue) has confused the two
types of funding, and thinks he can treat money raised from the broad
outreaches of a melting-pot society as if it were a homogenous private
foundation.

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).