Corbyn's Magnetism

Good to have some balance isn’t it?

It seems only reasonable to hear the voice of Mear One. In an interview she talked about a silkscreen print called The False Profits, based on "Freedom for Humanity".

Mear One: This silkscreen is based on a 2012 mural I painted off Brick Lane in the Shoreditch community of East London. I originally titled this piece “Freedom For Humanity” and experienced loads of controversy over the subject matter at the time of its creation. The mural, done entirely in spray paint, depicted a group of fat, old, decrepit white men playing a game of Monopoly on the backs of the working class.

My critique of the elite banking cartels brought a standard response from the conservative contingent in London who swiftly conspired to have the piece silenced, but not before the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) was able to televise the developing controversy surrounding the mural. During the filming of the BBC coverage, a man in a business suit holding a white spray paint can apparently walked right up to the mural and tagged the word “Haganah” over my piece marking the beginning of its removal. The term “Haganah” apparently is the name of a now defunct Jewish paramilitary organization. Members of the local neighborhood rallied behind me in support of protecting the mural, claiming its relevance to the current global situation. It has been suggested that certain conservative East London factions devised a covert attack in order to 1) discredit me by suggesting that I was anti-Semitic (which by the way is far form the truth) and 2) deface my work so it would have to be removed.

This heated debate went on for about 4 weeks until finally my mural was buffed by the local governing authorities, thus silencing the message and preventing the conversation from reaching anymore viewers. The story they were claiming was so far out and out of touch with reality – that I’m anti-Semitic and was trying to incite reactionaries and violence?! The message was too strong for some to cope with, but I know it was timely and relevant and it needed to be said. With the global economic situation collapsing financial systems across the planet we need more critical thought that shows resistance to this blatant disregard for humanity.

For this silkscreen, I have re-named this piece “False Profits” with the understanding that these charlatans are the real criminals who need to be dismantled. The support from many intelligent and critical minded journalists including Abby Martin from RT’s Breaking the Set has been tremendous and showed a different story and helped me to immortalize its message so that it wouldn’t be forgotten. “False Profits” is my interpretation of the excesses, greed, and manipulation by the ruling class of planet earth. The original “Freedom For Humanity” is out there in the digital realm and will continue to be heard as long as we have the internet.

I’ve been thinking a bit more gg and I wonder if his message is one of anti-globalism as well. This is a message that has attracted many recently, with which I can sympathise. But not entirely sure how it can be stopped - there is no doubt that the elite are extremely powerful.

I agree whitewave. As much as it may make us blanch we really should be able to analyse the message it was trying to give.

The Illuminati are a Catholic institution. The Freemasons, when formed, were a Protestant, anti-Catholic organisation. Bankers are bankers. People may not like the way it was painted but that does not mean that the artist does not have every right to depict the various groups who control a great deal behind close doors - unlike a government. He is showing that after the International financial collapse of 2008 these groups came out basically unscathed and are still playing their games with the lives of the working class.

So from this tiny bit of information that I have gleaned so far.

The question is

Did the artist intend “Freedom for Humanity” to be an overt or covert racial message?

In my opinion -after looking at his other work my answer to that question is an emphatic no. In my view Ockenden’s inspiration is not racist driven but driven by what he sees as the enormous social injustice and manipulation of the working class by the ruling elite.

Kalen Ockenden known as Mear One is called “The Michelangelo of Graffitti”

His work is inspired by ancient technology, Philosophy, science and mysticism. He uses his art to depict his frustration at what he considers to be a broken system - a visual language to describe the corruptions in America and the world at large.

His current body of work can be described as a series of allegorical paintings that draw upon history, mythology, political theory, modern myths and current events.

What I also forgot to say is that it depicts the ruling elite playing a game of monopoly on the backs of the working class.

To the right is a depiction of Mear One’s interpretation of the “Madonna of the Rosary” the original can be found in Dulwich Art Gallery.

Mear One has denied that the mural is racist.

I think to be able to make a more informed opinion I need to look at other work produced by Mear One.

So Mear One argues that the banking elite in America like the Rothchilds, the Morgan’s the Rockerfellers etc who are the ruling banking elite in the USA and to an extent throughout the western world. It represents the ruling class elite view of the world.

Behind the ruling class is the illuminati both a symbol of the Free Masons and representing here other secretive groups.

Behind the illuminati are coal fired and nuclear fouled power stations.

“The new world order is the enemy of humanity” is written in one corner

Hot air! Ye Gods!

2012 - the date this was produced. The bankers crash was still fresh in everyone’s mind and the artists aim was to defend the working class who in his opinion suffered most from the bankers crash.

Please do not think that I necessarily agree/disagree with the Mear One. But do think that he is entitled to be heard amongst all the hot air being produced.

Right dealing with it a bit at a time.

The illuminati

I think today in particular this depiction of a group acting in the shadows to pull strings of both government and art is particularly relevant. Look at the Cambridge Analytica controversy that is raging at the moment.

You are of course entitled to your view about the mural.

For myself I find it uncomfortable in the extreme and the images reminiscent of the Nazi propaganda.

However, I have no idea at this point what the artist intended I think before I comment further I will do a bit more research.

But in defending the right of an artist to produce controversial work is I think something that has a long intellectual tradition, and one to be defended in out free society.

Had the bankers and wealthy men been represented by men who were of every race/colour etc, simply the extremely wealthy ( on the backs of the poor) then it could be considered as a Banksy type mural and stayed ( if the Council wanted it) but not as it is.

It is nothing more than a well painted hate/race crime.

Primrose is absolutely right there is no other way to read it!
All this garbage about ‘art’ just does not wash.
This is not a painting hanging in an obscure gallery and painted a hundred years ago, this is a huge mural in the street and being seen by all who go past it.A huge painting depicting wealthy Jews discussing their aquisitions on the backs of the poor, shaved heads like slaves.
If this had been done showing Muslims or any other race/religion the far left on GN would be up in arms, and quite rightly, but they should also be up in arms about Jewish people being depicted in this way too.Not to do so means agreeing with the art message.
Am not at all surprised though, by the twisting and weasel words on here about it, it’s what I expected.
Even Corbyn has now said how wrong he was to say why should this art be washed off, as he says he didn’t really look at it.So, no excuse for anyone, having looked at it to say that it should stay.No excuse at all!

So why do you think extremist regimes on the the right and left wing have banned works of art Primrose65? If you can't look at the link then consider. A German WW1 artist banned by the Nazis because his depictions of war were too graphic, Salvdor Dali condemned by Marxists, The covering of MichaelAngelos figures because the church dispproved of genitals on display in the Sistine chapel, the condemnation of Caravaggios Death of the Virgin. Art is often controversial and the only regimes and organisations that really ban things are those that fear freedom of speech (I don't really expect a sensible reply to this, only more unjustified abuse)

Only if you are right primrose but in this case you are wrong

Lemongrove and Annie
Thanks for your support. It's a form of racism and that's really not acceptable. It's never pleasant to call this behaviour out or to read how people try and justify it, but I think you have to.

annie phew!

trisher both your argument and gg have a long standing tradition and one that many right wingers have chosen to extol when it suits them i.e. freedom of speech etc.

However most intelligent people recognise that this standpoint does not make those calling for freedom in art, anti-Semitic, or Nazi-sympathisers or fascist, according to the piece of art being under consideration..

It is a silly and unpleasant argument.

sorry not you whitewave

The last resort of the desperate resort to accusations and name calling. If you appove of regimes that censor art that's fine. But then please don't post about how you are concerned for freedoms and worried about authoritarian regimes. If any of you bothered to look at the range of art that has been considered controversial you would have realised that vested interests have tried to ban many works we now accept as some of the greatest . That doesn't mean that I consider this a great work by the way, simply that it has a right to exist as a work and that time will judge it.

annie if you do find it I will report myself

Any luck in finding it annie?