Wall Street: Why you shouldn’t be afraid to use your art as a weapon

In the past few years, art has become a tool for civil unrest and the spread of extremism.

And yet, despite its ubiquity, it is still relatively new, and art is still a relatively new form of art.

A recent article in The Wall St Journal explores the impact of artworks on social movements and their political influence, and offers an interesting perspective on how artworks can be used as weapons.

The piece below, titled “What Do I Do With Art?”, explores the importance of art to political activism and the political power of art in contemporary politics.

I am a professor of American Studies at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and a former writer for The Atlantic and the New Yorker.

I co-authored a book, American Politics in Crisis: The Art of Civil Resistance (2011), which discusses the evolution of the art world and the role of art as an instrument of resistance and resistance to authoritarianism.

The Wall is the home of this series.

Artwork is not a tool of tyranny, but a tool to fight it.

Art and Resistance Art is not the enemy of resistance.

The problem is, it often is.

As long as the art is in the public domain, people are free to use it as a tool, as a means of political expression.

But it’s a very small minority of people who use art as art.

When we look at artworks that have been used as a way to influence people, it’s important to keep in mind that the public is not in a position to know what’s in them.

That’s a huge limitation for the public to use art in a way that’s useful and meaningful.

The public does not know what the public can learn from the art, and they can’t use it without knowing what the artist thinks.

The power of artists’ political art has always been the opposite of the power of the artist’s propaganda.

That means that the artist, rather than being a master of his or her art, is always at the mercy of the public, even when the public has no interest in learning about the art.

The use of art has often been a tool used to advance a particular agenda or agenda of a political party.

The United States is a country where the political establishment is more than willing to use political artworks as a political tool to advance their own agendas.

We can see that with the use of the American Flag as a symbol in the presidential debates, or the Confederate flag, which is the official emblem of the Confederacy.

The Confederate flag was an official symbol of the South during the American Civil War, and its adoption during the Civil War was an act of political treason.

Artworks that are used as tools to advance political agendas are not only harmful to the public and the artists involved, but they also undermine the art itself.

It is a very powerful tool that can be abused.

In addition to its political effects, artworks also have political uses.

We see this in the use by political groups to recruit artists and to spread propaganda and ideas about the artists and their work.

The most common way for artworks to be used in this way is through political advocacy.

For example, the use in politics of the work of the late artist Paul Klee as a kind of political political poster, has often used the art as propaganda, and in doing so has often made the art more accessible to the masses.

And the use to promote political ideas in the arts, in addition to being political, is often about a different sort of agenda.

The political use of artists as political propaganda can be a very dangerous one.

We know that artists have been politically active for decades.

But we also know that many of them are very reluctant to become political artists because of their own political beliefs.

In other words, there’s a danger that the artists will use the art to advance the political agenda of their political party or their own ideology, which could be harmful for artists and the public.

But that is precisely what happens in the art market.

Artists sell artworks for money, but the money goes to the artists.

Art buyers are often motivated by money, not by art.

This means that artworks, as much as the political or the cultural impact, is very rarely a good or even necessary use of money.

So it is very important that the art sold in the market be used to promote the public good.

This is the most fundamental difference between a political artist and a political propaganda artist.

The politics are not based on a message, the artworks are based on the artist.

In the political arena, it makes a lot of sense to use an artist who has political convictions to present a message that is politically useful.

That way, if the artist does become a political activist, it will be an act that will be more beneficial for the artists’ own political views.

The artist is in a privileged position.

This makes the art very appealing to the artist because it makes the