I suspect there’s a continuum between art and propaganda. But the more radical and subversive an artwork is, the less political it is in some sense even if it has political implications. At least, a radical criticism can’t be faulted for serving the powers that be. Granted, communist art in a capitalist society would be political in that the artist would prefer a different political system. But what about art that satirizes politics in general? Again, the more radical a criticism is, the less overtly political or culturally-defensive it must be.