The distinction between pop art (it is usually not referred to as "low art") and high art (or high culture) was pursued among others by art critic Hilton Kramer (1928-2012). Kramer started out as an art editor for the New York Times but was led to establish a separate venue called The New Criterion.
Since the OP included "capitalism" among the tags, it is worth mentioning
that Kramer saw capitalism and modernism in art as allies, at variance with
a view that modernism's goal is to subvert capitalism.
I would add further that such a distinction is different from the artist/artisan distinction. Many greatest creations of the past that would be considered high art by all were in fact made on commission from wealthy patrons (for example, served a rather pragmatic purpose of glorifying this or that noble); similarly, many artists today produce work whose only destination is museums, that would be considered by all as pop art.