There is art that is beyond politics

1. Does the green sentence mean "my support of the art that is political means that I think art is beyond politics (given that it can challenge politics), in contrary to the idea that art should simply ignore politics"?

2. Does the red sentence mean "this is another example of the continuing debates about the nature of the connection between art and politics in art discourse"?

Context:

The art press severely criticized Crimp for advocating ACT UP’s merely “political art,” also accusing him of “hating” art. In response Crimp has noted that to argue for art that advocates for or avows politics is also to claim that there is art that “is beyond politics rather than art that simply disavows its politics.” The general inclusion of AIDS-activist goals in visual art in the 1990s, as ACT UP and Gran Fury practiced it, marked perhaps the most concerted postwar rejection of high-modernist definitions of art as autonomous, separate from the doings of society and the world. This is then another instance when the debate regarding the nature of the connection between art and politics has continued in art discourse.