Weimerica Weekly – Episode 6 – America Is A Communist Country

Welcome to Weimerica Weekly Episode 6. The podcast airs every Wednesday.

Weimerica Weekly is a podcast hosted by Ryan Landry that touches on the cultural, political and sexual topics that fill the mindspace of our United States of Weimerica. The politicization of all cultural and social degeneracy is examined with a focus on how it fits together.

Weimerica Weekly is produced by the Hestia Society and distributed by Social Matter.

Related Show Links:

Orgy  press coverage for its place during Miami Art Week.

Membership page at the website of the orgy provider Killing Kittens.

La Wik’s entry for the Dada Movement.

The Venona Project, Hidden History on Mockingbird and McCarthy, and the Amerasia case that scared Hoover about the depth of communist sympathies within the federal government.

Saunders article on Modern Art being a CIA weapon.

The Pierre Brassau hoax from 1964. More details and pictures of the chimpanzee artist.


If you are interested in sponsoring Weimerica Weekly, e-mail Ryan Landry at Mrossi34228 at gmail dot com. Sponsorships start at $10 an episode, and all proceeds will either go back into the podcast or provide some compensation for your most grateful host.

Subscribe to

Weimerica Weekly

Or subscribe with your favorite app by using the address below

Liked it? Take a second to support Social Matter on Patreon!
View All


  1. The Venona Papers is one of those documents that needs to be assigned reading for smug, knowing liberals.

  2. Those chimpanzee paintings were the best at the exhibition, because the chimp wasn’t actively trying to make something ugly.

  3. Thanks for the spiel on modern art and its relationship to the establishment. No one really knows what good art is, unfortunately. Me, I think categorizing art as establishment or rebellious probably isn’t a good idea for an artist. See, then you can get into kitsch, which is a formula too. Supposedly, the critic Clement Greenberg came up with the idea of kitsch as a reaction to what he perceived as middle brow, not avant garde but traditional, and probably not international which led him to advocate abstraction as the answer. Fact is, after the Hitler-Stalin pact the intellectuals went off communism. Returning to traditional western culture was unthinkable, so pure abstraction was the way out. Then, you had the pop art reaction.

    A lot of this stuff wasn’t bad, especially if you block out the reams of verbiage and look at the design. For awhile the curatoriat were a kind of shaman class that created mystery through words since you could write anything about abstraction. They spoke a curious language of “site specific” art, “immediacy”, “biomorphic forms”, and so on. They were the initiated. Burning Man is very much a part of this. But, Frankenegro is beginning to stir, smashing the carefully constructed system. Could be trouble up ahead.

  4. The CIA’s involvement in the modern art/feminism scene sure is interesting. It kinda, sorta, makes a guy wonder what kind of goodies they have bubbling on the burner as we speak.

    1. “The Venona Project, Hidden History on Mockingbird and McCarthy, and the Amerasia case that scared Hoover about the depth of communist sympathies within the federal government.”

      I guess it does make one wonder if the CIA has their fingers in any lefty social revolutionary movements like Femen, Pussy Riot, and possibly Anonymous, …then domestically, in things like BLM, OWS, Ferguson, Baltimore…etc?

  5. When you talk about art and who makes – doesn’t matter if it’s a Sub-Saharan African with anorexia or a bisexual Asian in a wheelchair – and their art being a rebellious insight, it reminds me of “indie” or “serious” movies shown at film festivals such as Sundance, Berlin, Cannes, Toronto, and Venice. Cannes being the most prestigious out of all of them.

    Granted there are a few gems, most can be said to be somewhat pretentious in their delivery as well as the performances within the films. A handful of the films in the main competition at Cannes will be talked about until the Oscars are announced. If at Cannes a film and/or performance is heralded, then the tone of that acclaim carries the film and/or performance throughout the year until the Oscars are announced. If your an actor whose acting skills are questioned and gain a prominent role in a film premiering at Cannes, the critics will herald you and any dirt from past performances will be shed. In my experience the performance never lives up the acclaim (see: Rob Pattinson in Cosmopolitan).

    A filmmaker who isn’t established within the industry, or isn’t named Xavier Dolan, most likely won’t get his film into the main competition or even into the festival at all. Said festivals are The Ivies of film festivals. Festivals like Cannes and Sundance one needs connections to gain a “Yes.” You’re better off sending your film or short to your local film festival in order to garner in hopes, years down the line that coveted civic crown will show up on your films bluray release.

    So, like paintings, film has its “serious side” were “serious artists” want in. Once they gain admittance and gain parts under direction of auteurs, their career is sort of made. Films entered in the most prestigious festivals are deemed “serious art.” If your film or performance is well-liked by the critics then it’s considered Gospel; any dissenters will look foolish questioning the nuances of ‘high art.’ But like the paintings and artists mentioned in this podcast, year after year it’s the same sh_t, more or less. The themes are the same. Hit pieces disguised will garner much talk. Whatever is put on a pedestal at Cannes will determine the line-up at the state festival circuit (with NYFF considered the most prestigious stateside film festival).

  6. I also want to add that that actors, some of them, hire the paparazzi to follow them around certain areas and at certain times. I was in contact with a retired actress and said that I found it odd that actors like Jennifer Garner wen to court to issue a law to protect their children of actors from being followed by the photographers, and in my memory I was not aware that any law in California being put into place that was the equivalent for adult entertainers. She later confirmed that, yes, a handful of actors have “behind the door” contracts with TMZ and the like to take their picture, creating a narrative of “intrusive general public who are jealous of these good-looking, talented and intelligent artists.” Or something like that. I always thought it was strange that paparazzi were rarely hit with lawsuits for stalking and invasion of privacy. Now I know why.

    In the entertainment world the actor is the product. Replacing the actor is a pain because of the time and money spent creating their brand. Agents are reluctant to sign on new talent and give them plum roles. This also explains why we see the same actors time again; established actors get the pick of the litter when it comes to scripts. Seeking out new talent for a “serious film” is not really an option: Give the role to an established actor because it’ll get the financiers to lay down their money on a film that most likely won’t gain a decent profit. The saving grace is that “it’s serious” and it was entered into Sundance later Venice. Instead, cast new (or relatively new) talent for determined blockbusters e.g. Daisy Ridley as Rey in Star Wars: The Force Awakens. If Ridley and her agents play their cards rights, she might slowly see herself entering the “established” realm, getting looks at the most coveted roles in her age range.

    This pattern and way of shuffling and dividing the roles between established actors, much to their ignorance, is what they despise: business. If the producers can’t get that “serious” film to gain profit, they’ll should for awards and critic circle nominations. If their film is nominated for an Oscar they hope that it’ll reduce the red.

  7. Ryan, great set of podcasts, keep it up!

    Speaking of the trend setting Brangelina-supercouple, just a quick anecdotal little story:
    We’ve got relatives that work in the movie business on backend/operational stuff. Several years ago, shortly after they finished a Brangelina movie, and having met the supercouple in flesh and blood, they were off on a jet plane to Africa—returning with their token bundle-of-joy fashion accessory. The kid is spoiled rotten, can do no wrong, is served on hand and foot and is kept on a pedestal. In the meantime, their biological kid and in her mid teens now, just came out on Facebook as a proud “bisexual” and supporter of the LGBTQWERTY movement. They are the quintessential happenin’ “edgy” family…

    Just to provide a contrast; just over a year ago, during the tail end of the Ebola scare, I worked with a deeply religious guy from flyover country—hard working, genuinely compassionate, an overall good shit and the type of guy that would give you the shirt off his back if in need. They already had four or five of their own kids but he told me how excited they were to be heading to Africa to adopt a kid. I can only attribute this to genuine altruism. With flyover people, you usually get the real deal, ….with “edgy” cosmopolites, not so much..

Comments are closed.