The Cultural Strike as Ethical Praxis: Labor, Complicity, and the Politics of Art in an Age of Atrocity
The Cultural Strike as Ethical Praxis: Labor, Complicity, and the Politics of Art in an Age of Atrocity
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™
June 19, 2026
The national strike of cultural workers across Italy on 12 June 2026, spearheaded by the Art Not Genocide Alliance (ANGA) in coalition with grassroots groups and trade unions, represents more than a localized labor action or protest against the 61st Venice Biennale. It embodies a profound philosophical intervention into the entangled realms of aesthetics, ethics, political economy, and moral responsibility. By explicitly linking precarious labor rights in the cultural sector to opposition against war, "art-washing," and the indirect funding of arms industries, the strike compels a re-examination of foundational questions: What is the moral status of art in a world of systemic violence? Can cultural institutions claim autonomy while deriving legitimacy and resources from structures of domination? And how does the figure of the cultural worker—as both producer and subject of precarity—reconfigure traditional notions of resistance and solidarity?
This essay collates and expounds these premises through philosophical lenses drawn from Marxist critiques of alienation, Adorno's negative dialectics of art and society, Judith Butler's ethics of precarity and grievability, and broader traditions of ethical criticism of art. It relates the strike to longstanding debates on the autonomy versus heteronomy of the aesthetic sphere, ultimately arguing that such actions affirm art's potential as a site of ethical interruption rather than mere spectacle or complicity.
Art, Autonomy, and the Specter of Complicity
The Venice Biennale, with its national pavilions and aura of cosmopolitan prestige, has long served as a stage for cultural diplomacy—what the strike organizers term "art-washing." This phenomenon echoes Walter Benjamin's warning in "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" that the aestheticization of politics risks turning culture into a tool for legitimizing power, including militarized power. In the context of the 61st edition, protests targeted Israel's participation amid accusations of genocide, alongside broader concerns about the normalization of conflict.
Philosophically, this raises the tension between l'art pour l'art (art for art's sake) and engaged art. Kantian aesthetics posits the artwork's purposiveness without purpose, a disinterested judgment that seemingly elevates it above mundane politics. Yet, as Theodor Adorno argued in Aesthetic Theory , art's autonomy is dialectical: it achieves critical force precisely by refusing direct instrumentalization, while remaining inextricably bound to the social totality it negates. "Art is the social antithesis of society," Adorno writes, but in an administered world, even this antithesis can be co-opted.
The ANGA-led actions expose this co-optation. When cultural institutions accept funding streams indirectly tied to arms industries or host pavilions representing states engaged in ongoing violence, they perform what critics call "ethics washing"—a superficial moral veneer that obscures material complicity. This is not mere hypocrisy but a structural feature of late capitalism, where prestige economies (Biennales, fairs, museums) rely on precarious gig labor while laundering the reputations of sponsors and nations. The strike disrupts this by refusing the separation of "pure" cultural labor from its ethical entanglements, insisting that the conditions of production—low wages, instability, extractive contracts—are inseparable from the political content (or silence) of the exhibited works.
Precarity, Grievability, and the Cultural Worker as Political Subject
Central to the strike is the linkage of labor rights with anti-war politics. Italian cultural workers, like many in the global "creative industries," inhabit a regime of precarity: short-term contracts, freelance dependency, and affective labor that blurs work and life. This echoes Guy Standing's "precariat" thesis and Pierre Bourdieu's analysis of how uncertainty undermines collective action. Yet the May 8 strike at the Biennale (involving dozens of pavilions and over 3,500 participants) and its national escalation demonstrate the opposite: precarity can radicalize rather than pacify.
Judith Butler's framework in
Precarious Life
and
Frames of War
is particularly illuminating. Butler distinguishes ontological precariousness (the universal vulnerability of embodied life) from politically induced precarity (differential exposure to harm). Cultural institutions often frame certain lives as grievable—worthy of mourning and protection—while rendering others ungrievable through omission or normalization. By striking, workers refuse to produce culture under conditions that render Palestinian (or other) lives unbearable, asserting instead a collective grievability that crosses labor and geopolitical lines. "The strike... links labor rights with opposition to war," as the premise states, enacting Butlerian solidarity: recognizing interdependence and refusing to partition ethical concerns.
From a Marxist perspective, this reveals alienation in the cultural sphere. Workers produce symbolic value that circulates in elite networks, yet their own reproduction is insecure, and the value they create may indirectly subsidize or aestheticize violence. The strike is thus a form of de-alienation : reclaiming agency by withdrawing labor, transforming the cultural worker from atomized freelancer into a class-like subject capable of bloc action alongside attendants, installers, and curators. ANGA's emphasis on cultural workers recognizing themselves "as a bloc" underscores this.
Ethical Criticism and the Imperative of Interruption
Traditional debates in the philosophy of art pit moralism (aesthetic value reduced to moral content) against autonomism (ethics irrelevant to aesthetics). The strike transcends this binary by enacting praxis : it is not merely about interpreting artworks but intervening in the material and institutional conditions of their presentation. Ethical criticism of art, as defended by thinkers like Noël Carroll, allows moral evaluation without reducing art to propaganda. Here, the "artwork" includes the strike itself—a performative, collective aesthetic-political event that generates new meanings and solidarities.
This aligns with relational aesthetics (Nicolas Bourriaud) or participatory practices, but radicalized: not harmonious interaction, but conflictual assembly. The Biennale's history of protests—from Cold War boycotts to anti-apartheid actions—shows culture as a contested terrain. The June 12 strike, spanning cities like Rome, Milan, and Naples, extends this into a national refusal, challenging the neoliberal fragmentation of cultural labor.
Philosophically, it echoes Gramsci's organic intellectuals or Rancière's "distribution of the sensible": those rendered invisible in the aesthetic regime (precarious workers, victims of distant wars) demand visibility and voice. By halting production, strikers reconfigure what counts as "art" and who counts as its subject.
Conclusion: Toward an Ethics of Cultural Refusal
The premise of the 12 June 2026 strike posits a profound unity: labor rights and opposition to genocide are not separate but co-constitutive struggles. In an era of perpetual crisis—climate, conflict, inequality—cultural institutions cannot retreat into claims of neutrality. As Adorno noted, there is no poetry after Auschwitz; likewise, there can be no untroubled Biennale amid ongoing atrocities without criticism.
This action invites philosophers, artists, and workers to rethink complicity not as individual guilt but structural positionality. It affirms culture's capacity for negation and interruption, where withdrawal becomes creation: of new alliances, new visibilities, and new ethical horizons. Whether such strikes can fundamentally transform the political economy of art remains open, but their philosophical significance is clear—they reclaim the cultural sphere as a site of conscience, solidarity, and resistance against the normalization of violence. In doing so, they remind us that true aesthetic freedom demands ethical vigilance, and that the labor of culture is always already political.
Refusal's Palimpsest: The Cultural Strike as Ethical Palimpsest in the Ruined Gardens of the Biennale
Curatorial Frame
As an art practitioner and gatekeeper who has spent decades shepherding exhibitions through the precarious archipelago of biennials, residencies, and underfunded institutions—while moonlighting as a cultural worker juggling freelance contracts, installation gigs, and the occasional existential crisis—I approach the national strike of Italian cultural workers on 12 June 2026 not merely as reportage but as a living curatorial proposition. This action, orchestrated by the Art Not Genocide Alliance (ANGA) alongside grassroots collectives and trade unions, transforms the 61st Venice Biennale from a glittering spectacle of pavilions and prestige into a contested site of ethical reckoning.
Picture it: on 8 May, during the Biennale's opening week, roughly thirty national pavilions partially or fully shuttered, artists affixed Palestinian flags to works, and over 3,500 participants converged in a 24-hour strike—the first of its kind in the event's history. This was no mere photo-op; it was a performative interruption, a collective *détournement* of the Giardini's neoclassical facades. By June 12, the refusal scaled nationally, with assemblies in Rome, Milan, Naples, Turin, Bologna, Lecce, and beyond, explicitly yoking labor precarity to opposition against war, art-washing, and the cultural sector's entanglement with arms funding.
This strike invites a curatorial frame that is academic yet humane, esoteric in its philosophical undercurrents, humorous in its ironic exposures of institutional absurdity, poignant in its acknowledgment of human vulnerability, erudite in drawing on critical traditions, and critical in dissecting power. Anecdotally, I recall curating a modest group show in a Venetian *sottoportego* years ago, where the fog of lagoon humidity mirrored the fog of ethical compromise: sponsors' logos discreetly placed, precarious assistants unpaid beyond "exposure." The strike names this fog and dispels it with the sharp wind of withdrawal.
Philosophically, the action resonates with Theodor Adorno's *Aesthetic Theory*, where art's autonomy is dialectical—resisting society by refusing direct utility, yet forever tainted by the administered world. Here, the Biennale's claim to cosmopolitan neutrality becomes the punchline of an ironic joke: a stage for "art-washing" where states accused of atrocities display their cultural cachet while cultural workers install, interpret, and precariously sustain the edifice. Judith Butler's ethics of precarity further illuminates this: ontological precariousness (our shared vulnerability) is politically exacerbated into differential grievability. The strike asserts that the lives of cultural workers—unstable contracts, affective exhaustion—and those rendered ungrievable in distant conflicts are intertwined.
Esoterically, one might invoke Walter Benjamin's angel of history, wings caught in the storm of progress, gazing upon ruins. The Biennale, with its layered histories of Fascist origins, Cold War diplomacy, and neoliberal spectacularization, is such a ruin. The strike is the angel's defiant pause—refusing to propel forward the machinery of normalization. Humorously, imagine the curatorial meetings where risk assessments for "political content" collide with the reality of installers on zero-hour contracts debating Hegel in the Arsenale shadows. Poignantly, it humanizes the gatekeeper: we who decide what enters the frame are ourselves framed by capital and geopolitics.
Critically, the premise disavows the false binary of "pure" aesthetics versus "political" art. As a practitioner, I have witnessed how institutions launder reputations—arms-linked philanthropists funding "dialogue" pavilions while precarity ensures compliant labor. ANGA's coalition exposes this as structural complicity, not individual failing. Anecdotally, a colleague once quipped during a late-night de-installation that the real artwork was the invisible labor holding the spectacle aloft; the strike makes that labor visible by withholding it.
Disconfirming the Alternatives on Their Merits and Premises
Alternative framings falter on empirical, ethical, and logical grounds. First, the liberal-autonomist defense: art as a neutral "space for dialogue" transcending politics. This premise, often invoked by Biennale administrators, crumbles under scrutiny. Historically, the Biennale has never been apolitical—Fascist pageantry in the 1930s, boycotts during apartheid, exclusions amid invasions. Selectively claiming neutrality now, amid documented protests involving hundreds of signatories and pavilion closures, is bad faith. Merit-wise, it ignores material realities: public funds, sponsorships, and national representations entangle culture with state power. Disconfirmed by the strike's success in mobilizing diverse workers, it reveals autonomy as a privilege for the isolated, not a principle.
Second, the economic dismissal: strikes harm artists' careers and audiences, prioritizing ideology over "art's freedom." Premised on a marketplace individualism that treats culture as a consumable spectacle, this ignores how precarity already disciplines workers (short contracts, gig economics). Data from similar actions shows heightened visibility and solidarity, not career ruin—many signatories, including prominent figures, amplified rather than diminished their voices. Humorously ironic: the "free market" of art relies on subsidized, state-backed platforms like the Biennale. Ethically, it fails Butlerian grievability by valuing pavilion attendance over lives. The strike's national scale affirms collective agency over atomized precarity.
Third, the relativist "both sides" or cultural equivalence argument, equating all geopolitical protests as equally disruptive. This premise dissolves under asymmetry: one side involves documented calls for exclusion based on international legal concerns and mass mobilization; the other, institutional inertia. It disconfirms itself by ignoring the strike's linkage of local labor rights to global ethics— not abstract equivalence but concrete solidarity. As gatekeeper, I reject it: curatorial responsibility demands discernment, not false balance.
These alternatives presuppose a depoliticized culture that the strike empirically and philosophically refutes. Their merits evaporate in the face of praxis: withdrawal as creation of new conditions.
Curatorial Narrative: A Critique
In curating this narrative, we walk the shadowed paths of the Giardini, where the strike's echo lingers like salt on the lagoon breeze. The 61st Biennale, titled evocatively yet haunted by "minor keys," became a palimpsest overwritten by refusal. ANGA's letter, signed by over 240 participants, demanded no genocide pavilion, linking Israel's participation to the normalization of violence. The May 8 strike operationalized this: pavilions closed, marches through Arsenale, workers from installers to educators uniting with unions like ADL Cobas, USB, and CUB.
Critically, this critiques the neoliberal cultural economy. Cultural workers inhabit Guy Standing's "precariat"—flexible yet disposable. The strike ironizes the Biennale's prestige: grand openings mask low wages and extractive contracts. Esoterically, it evokes Rancière's distribution of the sensible: who is visible, who speaks? By halting labor, strikers reconfigure the sensible, making invisible infrastructure audible.
Poignantly, one recalls anecdotal scenes—technicians sharing stories of exhaustion amid luxury previews; artists debating withdrawal while grappling with visibility. The national escalation on June 12, spanning 20 cities, extends this into a humane ethics of care: refusing to labor under conditions that normalize unbearable lives. Humorous irony abounds: the "international art world" confronted by Italian unions chanting against arms funding, revealing culture's entanglement with militarism.
Eruditely, Adorno would recognize the negative dialectic: art negates by refusing participation in its own co-optation. Butler adds the bodily dimension—precarity as shared vulnerability demanding response. The critique lands: institutions that aestheticize politics while disavowing complicity forfeit legitimacy. As a practitioner, I advocate curatorial frames that foreground such interruptions, not suppress them. The strike is not anti-art but pro-ethical art—creating space for genuine dialogue through refusal.
This narrative critiques from within: gatekeepers must gatekeep ethics, not just aesthetics. The alternative—business as usual—sustains the ruin.
Expanded Summative
Synthesizing the above, the strike emerges as a multifaceted intervention: labor action, ethical manifesto, aesthetic event, and philosophical proposition. It collates disparate threads—precarity, complicity, autonomy—into a cohesive praxis that relates local Italian cultural conditions to global crises. For the art practitioner, it models responsible gatekeeping: decisions on inclusion/exclusion are never neutral. For the cultural worker, it offers solidarity beyond individualism.
In summation, the events of May 8 and June 12 2026 mark a turning point. Building on ANGA's organizing, they affirm culture as contested terrain. Philosophically expansive, they engage negative dialectics, grievability, and the sensible. Critically, they disconfirm depoliticized myths. Poignantly and humanely, they center lived vulnerabilities. Ironically, the spectacle's disruption became its most compelling artwork.
This summative underscores potential: future curatorial practices must integrate such refusals, fostering institutions accountable to labor and ethics. The strike's legacy lies in its enigmatic exactness—refusal as generative force.
In-Depth Conclusion and Relation
Relating the premise back to broader currents, the strike weaves labor rights into anti-war ethics, exposing art-washing as symptomatic of deeper capitalist and geopolitical structures. It relates historical protests at the Biennale to contemporary urgency, affirming culture's role in interruption rather than pacification. In conclusion, as gatekeeper and worker, one sees hope in this collective withdrawal: it humanizes the field, demands better conditions, and insists art confront its shadows. The palimpsest endures—new inscriptions of solidarity over old scripts of complicity. True cultural vitality blooms not in pristine pavilions but in the fertile disruption of the strike.
Footnote:
¹ ANGA official statement, anga.live.
² Artforum report on June strike, June 9, 2026.
³ Adorno, *Aesthetic Theory*.
⁴ Butler, *Precarious Life*.
⁵ Hyperallergic coverage of nationwide action.
Bibliography
Art Not Genocide Alliance (ANGA). "Letter to the Biennale 2026." anga.live, March 2026. https://anga.live/.
*Artforum*. "Italian Arts Collectives Call For 'General Cultural Strike' On June 12." June 9, 2026. https://www.artforum.com/news/italian-arts-collectives-call-for-general-strike-1234751984/.
Butler, Judith. *Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence*. London: Verso, 2004.
Hyperallergic. "Italian Arts Workers Announce Nationwide Strike." June 8, 2026. https://hyperallergic.com/italian-arts-workers-announce-nationwide-strike/.
The Art Newspaper. "Cultural workers at Venice Biennale to strike over Israel's participation." May 6, 2026. https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2026/05/06/cultural-workers-venice-biennale-strike-over-israel-participation.
(Additional entries would expand similarly for Adorno, historical Biennale protests, etc.)
This framework honors the practitioner's dual vantage: curating with conscience amid the strike's profound call.
---
*** credit to the owners of the photo & articles otherwise cited
If you like my any of my concept research, writing explorations, art works and/or simple writings please support me by sending me a coffee treat at my paypal amielgeraldroldan.paypal.me or GXI 09053027965. Much appreciate and thank you in advance.
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™' s connection to the Asian Cultural Council (ACC) serves as a defining pillar of his professional journey, most recently celebrated through the launch of the ACC Global Alumni Network.As a 2003 Starr Foundation Grantee, Roldan participated in a transformative ten-month fellowship in the United States. This opportunity allowed him to observe contemporary art movements, engage with an international community of artists and curators, and develop a new body of work that bridges local and global perspectives.Featured Work: Bridges Beyond Borders His featured work, Bridges Beyond Borders: ACC's Global Cultural Collaboration, has been chosen as the visual identity for the newly launched ACC Global Alumni Network.Symbol of Connection: The piece represents a private collaborative space designed to unite over 6,000 ACC alumni across various disciplines and regions.Artistic Vision: The work embodies the ACC's core mission of advancing international dialogue and cultural exchange to foster a more harmonious world.Legacy of Excellence: By serving as the face of this initiative, Roldan's art highlights the enduring impact of the ACC fellowship on his career and his role in the global artistic community.Just featured at https://www.pressenza.com/2026/01/the-asian-cultural-council-global-alumni-network-amiel-gerald-a-roldan/
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™ curatorial writing practice exemplifies this path: transforming grief into infrastructure, evidence into agency, and memory into resistance. As the Philippines enters a new economic decade, such work is not peripheral—it is foundational.
I'm trying to complement my writings with helpful inputs and prompts. Bear with me as I am treating this blog as repositories and drafts.
Please comment and tag if you like my compilations visit www.amielroldan.blogspot.com or www.amielroldan.wordpress.com
and comments at
amiel_roldan@outlook.com
amielgeraldroldan@gmail.com
A multidisciplinary Filipino artist, poet, researcher, and cultural worker whose practice spans painting, printmaking, photography, installation, and writing. He is deeply rooted in cultural memory, postcolonial critique, and in bridging creative practice with scholarly infrastructure—building counter-archives, annotating speculative poetry like Southeast Asian manuscripts, and fostering regional solidarity through ethical art collaboration.
Recent show at ILOMOCA
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/16qUTDdEMD
https://www.linkedin.com/safety/go?messageThreadUrn=urn%3Ali%3AmessageThreadUrn%3A&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pressenza.com%2F2025%2F05%2Fcultural-workers-not-creative-ilomoca-may-16-2025%2F&trk=flagship-messaging-android
Asian Cultural Council Alumni Global Networkhttps://alumni.asianculturalcouncil.org/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPlR6NjbGNrA-VG_2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHoy6hXUptbaQi5LdFAHcNWqhwblxYv_wRDZyf06-O7Yjv73hEGOOlphX0cPZ_aem_sK6989WBcpBEFLsQqr0kdg
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™ started Independent Curatorial Manila™ as a nonprofit philanthropy while working for institutions simultaneously early on.
The Independent Curatorial Manila™ or ICM™ is a curatorial services and guide for emerging artists in the Philippines. It is an independent/voluntary services entity and aims to remain so. Selection is through proposal and a prerogative temporarily. Contact above for inquiries.
LanguageLoginCreate connection,Value conversation.For youWho we areMeet the teamICM cultureHow to applyStoriesContact usLanguageManage your cookie preferencesPrivacy & Cookie PoliciesTerms of useGlobal code of conduct & ethicsAll rights reserved Amiel Gerald Roldan® 2026***Disclaimer:This work is my original writing unless otherwise cited; any errors or omissions are my responsibility.The views expressed here are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of any organization or institution.Furthermore, the commentary reflects my personal interpretation of publicly available data and is offered as fair comment on matters of public interest. It does not allege criminal liability or wrongdoing by any individual.
*** credit to the owners of the photo & articles otherwise cited
Comments