In the popular imagination, artists are rebels — free spirits flicking Vs at authority while basking in the freedoms of Western democracy. But today’s creative class looks less like a band of iconoclasts and more like a guild of nervous bureaucrats. A new report from Freedom in the Arts (FITA) reveals institutions gripped by fear, where opinions outside the pages of The Guardian are about as welcome as a progress Pride flag in Gaza.
FITA surveyed nearly 500 respondents working across theatre, visual arts, literature and music. The report found 84 per cent don’t feel free to express their politics. Nearly 80 per cent report harassment for stepping out of ideological line, and 78 per cent agree with the statement “people working in the arts wouldn’t dare own up to right-of-centre political opinions”.
Report authors Rosie Kay and Denise Fahmy — one a choreographer, the other a former Arts Council insider — learned first hand the price of nonconformity. Both were professionally kneecapped for thought crimes that wouldn’t raise an eyebrow in the pub.
Those hoping to reach an audience soon learn that colouring outside the lines is professional self-harm
Their report reveals those experiences are far from isolated. Opinions — even those held by large swathes of the public or grounded in legitimate debate — are now considered “unsayable” in arts circles. Those surveyed know instinctively which topics are off-limits: “Discussion of the transgender phenomenon and ideology. Support for Israel or Jewish individuals in the Israel/Palestine conflict. Criticism of CRT and race theories. Any irreverence toward religion, particularly Islam … And so on.”
“Admitting you’re a Tory” was almost laughable to some respondents — “might as well wear a sign saying ‘kick me’,” quipped one.
The evidence of this ideological policing isn’t just in testimonies and data collected by FITA. It’s visible in the content gatekept from public view. Imagine a lecture at the London cultural hub featuring Israeli victims of Hamas, or a major gallery showcasing the medical wreckage left by gender ideology. And yet, should you want to “chart the daily lives, struggles and dreams of young people in Gaza,” head to the Southbank right now. Fancy exploring gender fluidity via a curated tour of old masters? Tate Britain is delighted to offer “LGBTQAI+ tours”.
Those hoping to reach an audience soon learn that colouring outside the lines is professional self-harm. The punishments are subtle but brutal. Books aren’t burned — they’re simply never stocked. Theatre commissions vanish. Festival invites evaporate.
This conformity isn’t state-imposed. It’s enforced by a neurotic and sanctimonious cultural elite. Behind every exhibition and funding bid lurks a politburo of clipboard communists — curators and commissioners more obsessed with ideological hygiene than aesthetic merit.
These dinner party bores seem to believe that we are on the cusp of a fascist uprising, and that the best way to deal with this is to suppress difficult conversations lest the impolite masses rampage through the dessert course. Consequently, the straplines and programmes of the UK’s major galleries have all the joy and creativity of a Stalinist five year plan. The Tate’s strategy boasts of an intention to “increase our holdings of women artists, LGBTQ+ artists, minority artists and artists of colour.”
Meanwhile the Barbican has a 17 point anti-racism action plan and is “rolling out zero tolerance training.” The Globe threatens to “create a diverse, inclusive and anti-racist organisation” meanwhile the National Theatre is committed to “making major strides in diversity and sustainability”. The only conclusion is that without the careful stewardship of their betters, galleries, theatres and literature festivals would become circuses of hate, with gay bashing in gift shops and KKK parades during the intervals.
In 1957, Russian-American artist Ben Shahn warned: “Without nonconformity we would have had no Bill of Rights or Magna Carta… no science at all, no philosophy.” He was right. The arts used to be a space for dangerous thinking, charting our progress as a species and helping us all to aspire to better lives. Safe art is not only unsatisfying, it is a product of fear and a sign of decline.
Culture follows courage. And right now, ours is moribund — ideologically policed, and creatively anaemic. Artists once acted as society’s conscience, not its compliance officers. If even they are too afraid to speak freely, who will?
