IMHO, there is nothing like a little bourgeois aestheticism to add a finishing touch to social revolution, for what better symbol for the revolution's conquest of the wealth of the ancient regime -- including its cultural wealth -- can be found than that? But rare are revolutionaries, religious or irreligious, who think so: today in 1966, Mao Zedong launched the Cultural Revolution.
Better to concentrate on struggle over political economy -- which was actually at the heart of the Cultural Revolution,* obscured as it was by all the cultural Sturm und Drang -- while letting everything go in culture, but no social revolution has done so yet.
* <http://kaladarshan.arts.ohio-state.edu/exhib/poster/pages/pages1/C14049M.ht ml>
[WS:] Here is link to more pictures from a cultural revolution http://new.photos.yahoo.com/wsokol52/album/576460762347086187 In my book, it is old fashioned kitsch and fascist brainwashing that has little to do with "bourgeois aestheticism."
As to the "conquest of the ancient regime" - that took the form of public humiliation and "trials" of intellectuals - high school teachers, music instructors, writers, actors. I have seen them being carted on trucks and beaten - no pictures, though, it was too risky.
One final comment, Yoshie. I think you should kiss the American soil in gratitude for protecting your right to post the revolutionary babble that you do, instead of the fate that you would more likely meet in the countries that your revolutionary babble extol: stoning you to death (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/pollitt) or mob lynching by revolutionary vanguards. While you are visiting my picture site, I also suggest that you go to the Siem Reap folder and find the photo of the skulls of those intellectuals who disagreed with the revolutionary regime of Pol Pot. It could have been yours.
Wojtek