in material things, in its laws and its dialectics, If the easel had been flung to the precipice of antiquities, the other side of the coin did not lie in the evasion of reality, or in the "drippling" of nonconformist and  tortured Pollock, but in the creation of a new coherence that would contribute to the reality with truth, joy and without aggravating stimuli in the search of "new inner feelings". Abraham Haber explained it as follows:

"Concrete art is fighting against a series of prejudices that are naturally rooted in the notion of traditional art. "Anyone can paint that way", it has been said contemptuously in front of the created painting. Indeed, this is so. It is a virtue. 
Anyone who elaborates an idea can materialize in an object the content of beauty that he is entitled to as a human being. If every man thinks, every man creates. The new art has paved the way to put this principle into practice". Such concepts were discussed by 

Haber and Lozza in the winter of 1947 (view image). They developed the idea that anyone who thinks could be a concrete creator, carry out his work and create beauty. In this way, a period in which, at least in theory for in practice concrete painting was and still is a subject-matter of minorities, art belonged to everyone and for everyone, which could be created by thinking individuals and not as a result of the work of an elite of gifted artists endowed with a certain stroke of genius and inventiveness. Each concrete painting, Lozza explained in the gatherings he attended, could be multiplied, reproduced as many times as one wished, and modified by applying the laws of nature and numbers. As a result, this new concept destroyed the rules of the market, razed the prices of the works of art to the ground, etc. It was an unsystematic transgression. Some years later, Andy Warhol would draw a similar conclusion. The main difference was that the American artist would apply such concept to the field of illustration and using very different techniques. His aim was to introduce art massively in the daily world of the consumer and with a view to corrode the entrails of individualism. Capitalism, however, won the battle. Raúl Lozza’s works validated by his signature are quoted in dollars, and Warhol’s works would reach the peak of financial valuation. To own them represented, in many cases, not aesthetic pleasure but pure business. 
But let us return to the aesthetic arena. It was in 1947, as Lozza pointed out, that he convinced himself that what had to be changed was not only the style but the system of painting. The same happens in the capitalist society, he explained, where if the purpose is to change it, unless the system is modified there will be no real change. This conclusion would give him the final impulse. In one of his writings for a symposium in New York, Lozza narrated that in 1946, on leaving the Concrete Art Association, which he had co-founded, he had put forward