Showing posts with label left. Show all posts
Showing posts with label left. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

NGO's






Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson

Jul 12, 2026 

NGO’s, or non-governmental organizations, feed the hungry and provide medical care to victims of disasters in the US and around the world. but your tax dollars help fund them, and many use that to push political agendas. Scott Thuman investigates.

-----------------------

P.S.



🇺🇸 House DOGE Subcommittee | 'Public Funds Private Agendas: NGOs Gone Wild' Hearing

Tuesday, June 09, 2026

Regional Conference Weighs in on Voter ID and Redistricting


May 26, 2026 NewsHound

On their Facebook page, the South Central (regional) conference posted a statement yesterday about voting rights. Here’s the statement:


Some Online Comments:
  • “For all those saying this is inappropriate? Remember that this church was founded on the abolition movement, religious liberty (for all), and supporting public policies that improve the social fabric (as misguided as temperance was). The SDA movement was progressive and political”
  • “As a SDA, and a person of color. I would like say this to this woke conference that no one is denying anyone to vote, especially me since I've been voting here in Georgia for many years. BTW...Showing your id to vote, is not racist. Perhaps the racists is the South Central Conference, please stop speaking for us, thank you.”
  • “No one is being denied the right to vote. Redistricting needs to be done in some cases to prevent the gerrymandering that has gone on for years. The church needs to stay out of this.”
  • “So what exactly is this letter saying? As far as I know, if you are a US citizen you have the right to vote. If you have to show identification to prove you are a citizen, I don't see the problem. Why would redistricting cause any issue? You still have that right. These are genuine questions, not arguments. Im not looking for opinion, I'd like facts.”
  • “This is pure politics dressed in holiness robes. Gerrymandering voter districts by race is illegal! That it has been done, and a slight bit of it is now being UNdone, is not a civil rights issue to begin protesting.”
  • “I wonder where the similar outrage post was when Virginia, California, New York, Massachusetts, etc. were all making similar redirecting changes. Strange how SDAs had no concern with politics then?”
  • “Thank you for this statement! HOWEVER!! This is NOT the stance of “the church“ by and large ( that a party or candidate is not endorsed). We need to address that. We are here because of “the church’s“ participation in what got us here in the first place.”
  • “Not like some SDA members care what is voted for. We voted on “no” women pastors but here we are.”

Thursday, May 28, 2026

AI chatbots face major backlash over left-wing bias: ‘Can no longer be considered neutral and cannot be trusted’


By Brian Flood , Fox News
Published May 26, 2026, 2:51 p.m. ET

Artificial intelligence chatbots are relying on left-wing media and politically charged sources, making it difficult for the average American to trust them as a news source, critics say.

AI systems are widely known to sometimes “hallucinate” and generate false yet believable information that can quickly erode trust.

Some critics insist chatbots such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini and Claude provide information with a liberal slant, or push information from left-leaning news sources while silencing opposing views.

As more and more Americans rely on the technology, the right-leaning Media Research Center (MRC) has conducted studies in an attempt to determine if the chatbots should be relied upon — and they don’t find the results encouraging.


“We’re watching the next phase of media bias unfold in real time,” Media Research Center President David Bozell told Fox News Digital.

“Silicon Valley’s shiny new toys can no longer be considered neutral and cannot be trusted.”

ChatGPT, which is developed by OpenAI, insisted in January that nobody named Charlie Kirk was ever assassinated and declared no credible evidence or reporting could substantiate such a claim, according to the MRC.


Some critics insist chatbots such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini and Claude provide information with a liberal slant, or push information from left-leaning news sources while silencing opposing views. irissca – stock.adobe.com

That same month, the MRC reported that Claude, which is developed by Anthropic, rejected the notion that AI should directly incorporate the US First Amendment into its policies.

Sunday, February 01, 2026

Leftist and liberal gun groups are seeing a rush of new members

By
Harmeet Kaur


People light candles at a makeshift memorial for Alex Pretti, who was shot and killed by federal agents in Minneapolis on January 24. Octavio Jones/AFP/Getty Images


Several niche, left-leaning gun advocacy groups said that since the killing of Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minneapolis, they can hardly keep up with the surging demand for firearms training.

With President Donald Trump sending armed federal agents into communities around the country, even more once gun-shy liberals and leftists are considering getting armed. And while Americans tend to think of gun owners as leaning more Republican and male, already more women, gay people and people of color have taken up arms in recent years, particularly after 2020.

Weekend classes at L.A. Progressive Shooters are sold out through March. Registrations for permit-to-carry courses at Pink Pistols Twin Cities, which serves LGBTQ people in Minneapolis and St. Paul, are up from an average of five people per class to 25 — the group recently added seven more courses to accommodate increased interest, and those are filling up, too. To paraphrase a recent meme: The right is arguing for gun control, and the left is buying guns.

“In the past couple of days, there has been a shift,” Lara Smith, national spokesperson for the Liberal Gun Club, says. “This changed views on the left.”

Alex Pretti, a beloved ICU nurse who cared for ailing veterans and an outdoorsman who was concerned about the environment, was also, like one-third of Americans, a gun owner. He was carrying his lawfully owned weapon in a holster before federal agents disarmed him and then fatally shot him.

Jordan Levine, founder of the inclusive gun community A Better Way 2A, says his organization has seen an influx of gun groups and instructors asking to join its resource page in the last few weeks — Ready Rainbow in Chicago, Grassroots Defense in Iowa and Solidarity Defense in Sacramento are a few recent additions. “People are scared and angry and want to equalize the power imbalance that we’re seeing on the news, where you’ve got ICE steamrolling people with no recourse,” he adds.

Philip Smith, founder and president of the National African American Gun Association, says membership in his organization has grown since Trump’s second term began and since Pretti was killed. “People join when they’re scared,” Smith says. “People join when certain people get in office, because it scares them. People join when they see these shootings across the country, and it seems like it’s just madness starting to grow more and more.”

Tuesday, January 27, 2026

"Did Trump just cave to the Radical Left—or are we missing the bigger pi...

 

"Did Trump just cave to the Radical Left—or are we missing the bigger picture?"

"In today’s episode, Drew vents his frustration and asks the uncomfortable question: What does it matter if we beat our enemies abroad if we’re losing to leftists at home? Trump sends a carrier strike group toward Iran, pressures Canada’s Prime Minister Carney to rethink cozying up to China, and negotiates hard with NATO over Greenland—clear wins on the global stage. 

But then comes Minneapolis. While Trump scores victories internationally, chaos and radical left ideology continue to dominate at home. Is this a strategic tradeoff—or a dangerous blind spot?"

...

Attacks On Christian Churches EXPLAINED In 5 Mins

Sunday, January 25, 2026

Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee (MIRAC)


Website: www.miracmn.com/

Location: Minneapolis, MN

Type: Immigration Advocacy Organization


Contact InfluenceWatch with suggested edits or tips for additional profiles.


The Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee (MIRAC) is a left-of-center immigration organization that advocates for the legalization of all illegal immigrants, calls to end all raids and deportations, and seeks to end all laws restricting immigration. MIRAC calls the United States unjust, racist, and based on white supremacy, and seeks to make Minnesota a sanctuary state. The organization has also sided against Israel and called for divestment from the country.

History

The Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee is a volunteer-based immigration advocacy organization based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. 1 MIRAC organizes groups that oppose U.S. border-enforcement policy, rally for citizenship for all, and seek to stop immigrant deportations. 1

Positions

The Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee advocates for the legalization of all illegal immigrants, calls to end all immigration-enforcement raids and deportations, and wants all immigrants to receive legal recognition. 1 MIRAC calls the immigration system in the United States racist, unjust and white supremacist. 1 MIRAC states that the U.S. has taken part in imperialist wars and has an unjust economic system that are the roots of migration to the country. 1

Wednesday, September 17, 2025

The Left belittles prayer. Are they right?


By Jerry Newcombe, CP Op-Ed Contributor Sunday, September 07, 2025


People visit a growing memorial outside of Annunciation Catholic Church on Aug. 29, 2025, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. On Aug. 27 a gunman fired through the stained-glass windows of the church while students were sitting in pews during a Catholic school Mass, killing two children and injuring at least 17 others. The gunman reportedly died at the scene from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, according to police. | Scott Olson/Getty Images

Last week, the shooter in Minneapolis of little children in a Catholic church-school during mass was discovered to have written on one of his weapons, “Where is your god [sic].” He used a picture of Jesus on his target in practice before the big day of shooting last Wednesday.

And now the left says to us in effect: “Don’t pray, just prey.” The last part refers to allowing unfettered evil to flourish — to continue to prey on the weak and vulnerable.

As Gary Bauer noted last Thursday: “Satan wrote the script for the atrocities that transpired yesterday at a Minneapolis Catholic church and school. The transgender shooter’s message, ‘Where’s your God now,’ wasn’t referring to Allah. It was referring to the God of the Bible, the God Catholics, Jews, and Protestants worship. The only God, by the way. ‘Where’s your God now’ was Satan mocking God.”

It’s amazing to see how swift the condemnation from the Left was against even the idea of prayers — as if prayers alone were the solution offered to try and stop these things. They do hint at the solution: to get back to the knowledge of God, the one who is there and who will hold us all accountable one day.

Thursday, September 04, 2025

How The New York Times article "The Constitution is Sacred. Is it also Dangerous?" is a prime example of left leaning media bias




Ethan Justice
Sep 2, 2024

The New York Times article titled "The Constitution is Sacred. Is it also Dangerous?" can be seen as an example of left-leaning media bias due to its framing, selection of sources, and overall narrative. The article critiques the U.S. Constitution by suggesting that it has become a barrier to true democratic governance and even implies that it might be dangerous in the modern context. This perspective aligns with a broader progressive argument that some constitutional mechanisms, like the Electoral College and the lifetime appointment of Supreme Court justices, are outdated and undemocratic.

Critics of the article argue that it reflects a left-leaning bias because it predominantly highlights viewpoints that question or criticize the Constitution, often linking its perceived flaws to current right-wing political successes. The article also references scholars and authors who propose radical changes to the Constitution or even suggest its abolition, which aligns with progressive critiques of the Constitution as a tool that reinforces minority rule and systemic inequities. Furthermore, the article’s focus on issues like the role of white men in drafting the Constitution and its connections to slavery can be seen as reinforcing a narrative that the Constitution is inherently flawed, a viewpoint more commonly associated with progressive or left-leaning ideologies.

These elements contribute to the perception that the article is biased, as it gives significant weight to critiques of the Constitution without equally presenting counterarguments that defend its relevance and adaptability in modern times. This kind of framing is often cited as evidence of the New York Times' left-leaning bias in its coverage of foundational American institutions​.

To offer a more balanced view of the Constitution's relevance today, it's essential to include counterarguments that defend its enduring value and adaptability.

Monday, May 21, 2018

'Jesus never charged a leper a co-pay': rise of the religious left



From healthcare to tax and immigration, Rev William Barber and the Poor People’s Campaign are driven by faith to focus on the disadvantaged

by Lauren Gambino in Washington


Mon 21 May 2018 08.13 EDTFirst published on Mon 21 May 2018 07.38 EDT


In his prayer at the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem last week, a prayer delivered against a backdrop of violence in Gaza, the evangelical pastor Robert Jeffress said Donald Trump was a moral leader who stood “on the right side of you, oh God”.

Will evangelicals come out for Trump's Republican party in November?

Half a world away, outside the Capitol in Washington, the Rev William Barber led a moment of silence for the 60 Palestinians killed by Israeli soldiers.

As one group of faith leaders celebrates the fruits of a decades-long alliance with the Republican party, another is mounting a multi-faith challenge to the dominance of the Christian right, an attempt to recapture the moral agenda.

“There is no religious left and religious right,” Barber, a pastor and political leader in North Carolina, told the Guardian. “There is only a moral center. And the scripture is very clear about where you have to be to be in the moral center – you have to be on the side of the poor, the working, the sick, the immigrant.”

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

WikiLeaks: Podesta and Left-Wing Activist Plot ‘Catholic Spring’




Longtime Clinton confidante discussed infiltrating the Catholic Church with progressive ideology to foment revolution


by Edmund Kozak | Updated 12 Oct 2016 at 2:03 PM


A newly leaked email shows Hillary Clinton’s current campaign chairman John Podesta and a Left-wing activist casually discussing fomenting “revolution” in the Catholic Church.

“There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic Church,” Sandy Newman, president and founder of the progressive nonprofit Voices for Progress, writes to Podesta in an email titled “opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing.”

“There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic Church.”

The emails were leaked in the third round of releases of Podesta’s emails by WikiLeaks.

Newman, who is Jewish, admits he does not know much about the Catholic Church and isn’t volunteering personally to subvert Catholic teachings. “Even if the idea isn’t crazy, I don’t qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about how one would ‘plant the seeds of the revolution,’ or who would plant them.”

In response, Podesta assures Newman to rest easy for he and his progressive pals have already created organizations explicitly designed to infiltrate the Catholic Church with progressive ideology, though he cautions that the time may not be right for full revolution — just yet.



“We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now. Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this one will have to be bottom up,” Podesta writes.



The conversation further reveals the contempt with which radical progressives view Catholics and the Catholic Church. On Monday, WikiLeaks published an email showing Democratic operatives mocking conservative Catholics.

Related Content



PoliZette

New York Times Gave Hillary Veto Power

WikiLeaks emails show reporter agreed to let Clinton campaign cut quotes before story ran

A scholar at the Left-wing Center for American Progress emailed Podesta in 2011 bashing then-Fox News CEO Roger Ailes for his Catholic Faith.

"It’s an amazing bastardization of the faith," John Halpin wrote to Podesta, and Jennifer Palmieri, now the communications director of the Clinton campaign. "They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy."

Palmieri, agreed.

"I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion," she wrote. "Their rich friends wouldn’t understand if they became evangelicals."


Source


Thursday, August 11, 2016

POPE FRANCIS AND THE DECLINE OF THE WEST


The pope of the Roman Catholic Church should be its greatest advocate. But because of leftism, he isn't.

August 11, 2016 

Dennis Prager





Pope Francis made comments last week that reveal the most important single thing you need to know about the modern world: The most dynamic religion of the last hundred years has been leftism. Not Christianity, and not Islam, but leftism.

Leftism has taken over the world's leading educational institutions, the world's news media and the world's popular entertainment, and it has influenced Christianity (and Judaism) far more than Christianity (or Judaism) has influenced anything.

On July 26, two Muslims slit the throat of a French Roman Catholic priest, the Rev. Jacques Hamel, 85, while he was saying Mass in his church.

Five days later, during his flight returning to Rome from World Youth Day in Krakow, Poland, Pope Francis gave a press conference. He was asked about the French priest and Islam by Antoine-Marie Izoard, a journalist with I.Media, a French Catholic news agency. Izoard said:

"Catholics are in a state of shock — and not only in France — following the barbaric assassination of Father Jacques Hamel in his church while he was celebrating Holy Mass. Four days ago ... you told us once again that all religions want peace. But this holy priest, eighty-six years old, was clearly killed in the name of Islam. So I have two brief questions, Holy Father. When you speak of these violent acts, why do you always speak of terrorists but not of Islam? ... And then, ... what concrete initiative can you launch or perhaps suggest in order to combat Islamic violence?"

Pope Francis responded:

"I don't like to speak of Islamic violence because every day when I open the newspapers I see acts of violence, here in Italy: someone kills his girlfriend, someone else his mother-in-law...and these violent people are baptized Catholics! They are violent Catholics...If I spoke about Islamic violence, I would also have to speak about Catholic violence."

The pope of the Roman Catholic Church, when asked about Islamic terror and the slitting of the throat of a Roman Catholic priest by Islamic terrorists, responds that there is also Catholic terror — that a man who was baptized Catholic who "kills his girlfriend" is the moral and religious equivalent of Muslims who engage in mass murder in the name of Islam.

How can anyone compare:

—A person who happens to have been baptized Catholic as a child — and may have no Catholic identity as an adult — with an adult who affirms a religious identity?

—The murder of a girlfriend (most likely a crime of passion) with the ritual murder of a Catholic priest because he was a priest?

—Individual murders that have nothing to do with any ideology with mass murders committed in the name of an ideology?


Pope Francis then added:

"Terrorism is everywhere! ... Terrorism ... increases whenever there is no other option, when the global economy is centred on the god of money and not the human person, men and women. This is already a first form of terrorism. You've driven out the marvel of creation, man and woman, and put money in their place. This is a basic act of terrorism against all humanity. We should think about it."

Terrorism grows "when there is no other option"?

The implication that Islamic terrorism is a desperate act arising from poverty is widely held on the left. But it is false. Most Islamic terrorists come from the middle class or above. In the recent case of the Bangladeshi terrorists, for example, nearly every one of them came from some of the wealthiest families in Bangladesh. And, as is well-known, most of the 9/11 hijackers came from middle- and upper middle-class families.

Islamic terrorism doesn't come from economics; it comes from its theology.

Terrorism grows "when the global economy is centred on the god of money"?

The pursuit of money and terror have nothing to do with each other. Terrorism grows only when some ideology preaches it. All this statement does is provide an excuse for Islamist terror by blaming the "global economy" and the "god of money" instead of the terrorists and their god of death.

A "first form of terrorism" is when "the global economy is centred on the god of money"?

It is a bad thing when money becomes a god, but there is no comparison between the "god of money" and the horrors of Islamic terror. Yazidi women weren't gang raped and burned alive because of the "global economy" and its "god of money."

The only explanation for these statements is that Pope Francis has inherited his theology from Catholicism, but unlike his immediate predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, he has inherited much of his moral outlook from leftism.

The Western combination of Judeo-Christian morality and political liberalism — with its doctrine of moral accountability, moral absolutes, confronting evil, and political and social freedom — has produced the most moral societies in world history.

The pope of the Roman Catholic Church should be its greatest advocate. But because of leftism, he isn't.




Tuesday, March 11, 2014

The emergence of radical Catholic social philosophy





Catholic Progressives in England after Vatican II -- By Jay P. Corrin

In his latest book, Jay P. Corrin examines a significant and little-known subject: the post-Vatican II Catholic progressive movement in Britain, its leaders, and the political and cultural context of the time. He focuses on the emergence of reformist thinking as represented by the Council, and the corresponding revolutionary response triggered by the church’s failure to expand the promises of reform to the satisfaction of Catholics on the political left. The resistance of the Roman Curia, the clerical hierarchy, and many conservative lay men and women to reform was challenged in 1960s England by a cohort of young Catholic intellectuals; in response, they launched a path-breaking journal of ideas called Slant.

What made Slant revolutionary was its success in developing a coherent philosophy of revolution based on a synthesis of the “New theology” fueling Vatican II and the New Left’s Marxist critique of capitalism. Called “a fascinating story” by The Tablet, Corrin’s account of the Slant movement draws “copiously on conversations and correspondence with participants, notably Terry Eagleton, Bernard Sharratt, Martin Shaw, Adrian and Angela Cunningham and Christopher Calnan” Their bold and imaginative efforts inspired many younger Catholics who had despaired of connecting their faith to contemporary social, political, and economic issues.

“In Catholic Progressives in England after Vatican II, Jay P. Corrin situates the journal Slant within the broad sweep of reformist Catholic thinkers and actors across the twentieth century and into the twenty-first. Drawing upon an impressive range of primary and secondary sources, both scholarly and journalistic, Corrin illuminates the journal’s pivotal role in English Catholic liberal thought and action and the impact its contributors’ ideas continue to exert across the decades.” —Steve Rosswurm, Lake Forest College

Jay P. Corrin is professor of social sciences at Boston University. His book Catholic Intellectuals and the Challenge of Democracy (University of Notre Dame Press, 2002) won the American Catholic Historical Association’s John Gilmary Shea Prize in 2003.


Catholic Progressives in England after Vatican II


Jay P. Corrin

Publication Date: November 29, 2013

ISBN: 978-0-268-02310-2 / Paperback $49.00

ISBN: 978-0-268-07700-6 / Ebook Perpetual Ownership, $34.30; Ebook 30-day Ownership, $7.00

To order: http://undpress.nd.edu/book/P03079

The University of Notre Dame Press is one of the leading American university presses publishing in the areas of religion and theology. For our complete list, visit us at http://undpress.nd.edu



Contact

Emily McKnight

emcknigh@nd.edu

574.631.4909
 
Source
.

Monday, March 10, 2014

Destroyed By Rockefellers, Mural Trespassed On Political Vision



by Allison Keyes
March 09, 2014 9:00 AM

Listen to the Story
Weekend Edition

4 min 33 sec



After the Rockefeller Center mural was destroyed in 1934, Diego Rivera recreated this version, named Man, Controller of the Universe, which is on display at the Palacio de Bellas Artes in Mexico City. The story of the original mural's creation and destruction is the focus of a Mexican Cultural Institute exhibition in Washington, D.C. 
Courtesy of Museo Frida Kahlo


When Mexican artist Diego Rivera was commissioned in 1932 to do a mural in the middle of Manhattan's Rockefeller Center, some might have wondered whether industrialist tycoon John D. Rockefeller Jr. knew what he was getting into.

In 1934, the legendary artist's work was chiseled off the wall.

Now, in Washington, D.C., the Mexican Cultural Institute has mounted a show that tells what happened to Rivera's mural.



Artist Diego Rivera stands with a copy of the mural he painted at Rockefeller Center that was eventually destroyed. 

A. Estrada /Courtesy of Museo Frida Kalho


"Man at the Crossroads: Diego Rivera's Mural at Rockefeller Center," is a whodunit tale that also illustrates the tensions between art and politics. Exhibition co-curator Susana Pliego says the Rockefeller family was aware of Rivera's leftist politics when it commissioned the work.

"They tried to have pieces of the best artists at the time," Pliego says. "That was why [they wanted it], because of the artistic and commercial value of his work."

Pliego says Rivera got a three-page contract laying out exactly what management wanted.

Rivera was asked to show a man at the crossroads, looking with uncertainty but with hope and high vision to the choosing of a course leading to a new and better future.

"The theme of Rockefeller Center was 'New Frontiers,' so that was a very spiritual way of looking at development and art," Pliego says. She wonders what made the Rockefellers think that Rivera's vision would be the same as theirs.

A Difference Of Vision

"It was a bad decision for everyone, but it's about politics," co-curator Pablo Ortiz Monasterio says. "When you have to take a position, there is no other way out."

Monasterio says the show illustrates the conflict between the rich, powerful family that hired Rivera and the artist's strong political point of view.

Pliego says the original sketch for the mural — and what Rivera agreed to paint — included three men clasping hands in the middle: a soldier, a worker and peasant. "A spiritual union of all the three elements that Rivera thought man — humanity — was composed of," she says.

"Unfortunately, what he painted was different from the sketch," David Rockefeller Sr. told the Museum of Modern Art in 2012.



An early sketch of the mural shows how it differed from what Diego Rivera painted in Rockefeller Center. 
Courtesy of Museo Frida Kahlo


The leftist artist was taunted by those who felt he had sold out, Rivera expert Linda Downs says.

"He was really provoked in New York by leftist organizations and various communist groups that challenged him for painting for Rockefeller," she says.

Then, the World Telegram newspaper ran the headline: "Rivera Paints Scenes of Communist Activity and John D. Jr. Foots the Bill." Pliego says Rivera then decided to add a portrait of communist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin to the mural.

"He sent his assistants to find a picture of Lenin because, he said, 'If you want communism, I will paint communism,' " Pliego says.

On top of that, according to David Rockefeller Sr., Rivera added a panel that the family felt was an unflattering portrait of his father.

"The picture of Lenin was on the right-hand side, and on the left, a picture of [my] father drinking martinis with a harlot and various other things that were unflattering to the family and clearly inappropriate to have as the center of Rockefeller Center," he said.

"He had these two options," Monasterio says. "He could erase that and solve the problem, but if he didn't, then that would be a scandal; that would be propaganda. So he himself was at the crossroads again."

Rivera had persuaded his patrons to let him paint a fresco — paint on wet plaster instead of on canvas. That meant the work couldn't be moved. After a flurry of letters asking Rivera to replace Lenin and the artist's declaration that he'd rather see the work destroyed than mutilated, Rivera was fired and the work was eventually chiseled off.

A Missing Piece Of History

Downs says the piece would have been stunning had it survived.

"He had this vision of the importance of technology in the future and the hope that there would be a coming together of workers and industrialists and businessmen to further mankind in general," Downs says. "It was a very hopeful mural."

Pliego says the exhibition illustrates a key question: Who owns a work of art?

"For example, like Diego said in a letter," she says, "'If someone buys the Sistine Chapel, does he have the authority to destroy it?' "

The exhibition, "Man at the Crossroads: Diego Rivera's Mural at Rockefeller Center," reconstructs the story of the mural through reproductions of documents, letters, photographs and Rivera's sketches. It will be on display at the Mexican Cultural Institute in Washington, D.C., through May 17.


Source
.