I have not read the article so my knee-jerk reaction is probably unfair, but:
"an artist with a responsibility towards the people"
Immediately made me think of fascist-adjacent "art should be morally instructive" rethoric
I have now read the article and my initial reaction was unfair. It's closer to tankie-adjacent rethoric.
But it's mostly bad class analysis and misuse of the word "bourgeois" purely as a thought-terminating cliche.
I think there is an interesting discussion we can have about the many roles art plays in our society and how that is influenced by/influences the people that make that art. But this article is more concerned with identifying which artists are class-traitors I guess.
The tankie (or at least Maoist and Stalinist) approach to art is fascist-adjacent. It's often very hard to distinguish the two rhetorics without context. There's a quote of Trotsky that I'm definitely misremembering, something like "it would seem that Stalin had stolen these slogans from Goebbels--had Goebbels not first stolen them from Stalin"
