Good questions. I've made several posts nearly identical to yours over the years. While I agree with you in nearly every particular, let me make a few comments.
Liberals control virtually the entire academic, media, bureaucratic and cultural apparatus. They saw years ago the immense power to be had by controlling the agenda for the entire culture. They also love to burrow into soft, high-paying jobs at taxpayer expense, where they can make rubber rules. I'll never forget my amazement when I made a transition from employment in the private sector to a university environment. My-oh-my, what a difference! There were all sorts of nice benefits but I quickly realized the taxpayers were getting screwed -- and still are.
If conservatives try to function in that culture it's pretty much a lost cause. They will be censored, trivialized and scorned. Conservatives are motivated by bottom-line profits. If they see a chance to generate them, as Rupert Murdoch did with Fox News, they'll risk the money necessary to set up an entirely new conservative-friendly structure. (And it may be that Murdoch will be an inspiration to other "angels" to finance similar enterprises -- I sincerely hope so). But can you imagine trying to get a conservative script acccepted by Disney or any of the other reigning Hollywood studios?
On the positive side, conservative books are having a good run on the best-seller lists right now, and a climate is slowly being created where it isn't instant social death to utter a conservative thought in public. But we have a long way to go and I join you in urging young people to seek careers in the arts, education and government where they, too, can influence the national agenda -- and prospects for their own futures.
Painting
Excerpts from the Futurist Manifesto, 1910:
"That all forms of imitation must be despised, all forms of originality glorified... that it is essential to rebel against the tyranny of the terms "harmony" and "good taste" as being too elastic expressions...that all subjects previously used must be swept aside in order to express our whirling life of steel, or pride, of fever and of speed... that the name of "madman" with which it is attempted to gag all innovators should be looked upon as a title of honor."
Slogans of Dadaism, 1919.
“DADA stands on the side of the revolutionary Proletariat. Open up at last your head. Leave it free for the demands of our age. Down with art. Down with bourgeois intellectualism. Art is dead. Long live the machine art of Tatlin. DADA is the voluntary destruction of the bourgeois world of ideas.”
Tristan Tzara “Lecture on Dada”, 1924.
“The acts of life have no beginning or end. Everything happens in a completely idiotic way. That is why everything is alike. Simplicity is called Dada... As Dada marches it continuously destroys, not in extension but in itself. From all these digusts, may I add, it draws no conclusion, no pride, no benefit. It has even stopped combating anything, in the realization that it’s no use, that all this doesn’t matter... Like everything in life, Dada is useless.”
Pablo Picasso, conversation on Guernica, 1945:
“If I paint a hammer and sickle people may think it’s a representation of Communism, but for me it’s only a hammer and sickle. I just want to reproduce the objects for what they are and not for what they mean. There is no deliberate sense of propaganda in my painting...except in the Guernica. In that there is a deliberate appeal to people, a deliberate sense of propaganda...I am a Communist and my painting is Communist painting...But if I were a shoemaker, Royalist or Communist or anything else, I would not necessarily hammer my shoes in a special way to show my politics.”
Jackson Pollock, 1944:
“American painters have generally missed the point of modern painting from beginning to end...The idea of an American painting, so popular in this country during the thirties, seems absurd to me just as the idea of creating a purely American mathematics and physics would seem absurd...the basic problems of contemporary painting are independent of every country.”
Barnett Newman, “The Sublime is Now” 1948:
“I believe that here in America, some of us, free from the weight of European culture, are finding the answer, by completely denying that art has any concern with the problem of beauty and where to find it...We do not need the obsolete props of an outmoded and antiquated legend... We are freeing ourselves of the impediments of memory, association, nostalgia, legend, myth, or what have you, that have been the devices of Western European painting. Instead of making cathedrals out of Christ, man, or ‘life’ we are making it out of ourselves, out of our own feelings.”
Music
From Alban Berg and Arnold Schoenberg, the Statement of Aims, 1919:
“The performances must be removed from the corrupting influence of publicity; that is, they must not be directed toward the winning of competitions and must be unaccompanied by applause or demonstrations of disapproval... performances shall be in all respects private; that guests (foreign visitors excepted) shall not be admitted, and that members shall be obligated to abstain from giving any public report of the performances and other activities of the Society...”
From Luigi Russolo, A Futurist Manifesto, 1913:
“The art of music at first sought and achieved purity and sweetness of sound; later, it blended diverse sounds, but always with the intent to caress the ear with suave harmonies. Today, growing ever more complicated, it seeks those combinations of sounds that fall most dissonantly, strangely, and harshly upon the ear. We thus approach nearer and nearer to the Music of Noise. We must break out of this narrow circle of pure musical sounds, and conquer the infinite variety of noise-sounds.”
Milton Babbit, “Who cares if you listen?” 1958
“Why should the layman be other than bored or puzzled by what he is unable to understand, music or anything else?... I dare suggest that the composer would do himself and his music an immediate and eventual service by total, resolute, and voluntary withdrawal from this public world to one of private performance and electronic media, with its very real possibility of complete elimination of the public and social aspects of musical composition. But how, it may be asked, will this serve to secure the means of survival for the composer and his music? One answer is that after all such a private life is what the university provides the scholar and the scientist. It is only proper that the university, which—significantly—has provided so many contemporary composers with their professional training and general education, should provide a home for the “complex,” “difficult,” and “problematical” in music. Indeed the process has begun.”
John Cage, “History of Experimental Music in the United States.” 1966
“We know that sounds and noises are not just frequencies (pitches): that is why so much of European musical studies and even so much of modern music is no longer urgently necessary. It is pleasant if you happen to hear Beethoven or Chopin or whatever, but it isn’t urgent to do so any more. Nor is harmony or counterpoint or counting in meters of two, three, or four or any other number... There are people who say, ‘If music’s that easy to write, I could do it.’ Of course they could, but they don’t.”
Literature
Sylvia Plath, 1949:
“I am afraid of getting older, I am afraid of getting married. Spare me from cooking three meals a day—spare me from the relentless cage of routine and rote. I want to be free.... I want, I think, to be omniscient... I think I would like to call myself ‘The girl who wanted to be God.’”
Adrienne Rich, It is the Lesbian In Us, 1976
“Even before I wholly knew I was a lesbian, it was the lesbian in me who pursued that elusive configuration. And I believe it is the lesbian in every woman who is compelled by female energy, who gravitates toward strong women, who seeks a literature that will express that energy and strength. It is the lesbian in us who drives us to feel imaginatively, render in language, grasp, the full connection between woman and woman.”
Quotes compiled from: Herschel B. Chipp Theories of Modern Art, 1968; Piero Weiss and Richard Taruskin, Music in the Western World: A History in Documents, 1984; Sandra B. Gilbert and Susan Gubar, The Norton Anthology of Literature by Women, 1985.
You're absolutely right. We obviously can't rely on liberal institutions to let us defeat them. If we play on their chosen field of battle, well, we are lost before we even start. That's why we have to methodically start building the opposition from the ground up--networks, media outlets, artists, composersm, writers. Build up a giant before they notice and then swat them out of the park with the free market. That's exactly what Fox did--that network was laughed at a decade ago, and now they are winning NFL rights and ratings wars from CNN. (Although I admit their conservative credentials are weak, considering the amount of sensationalist trash they put on their network.)
And, like you said, the left has propped themselves up in taxpayer-supported institutions. That also has to be one of our aims--to dry up their pipeline to our money. But of course, we can cut them off all we want, if theirs is the only art out there, they they win the game by default.