holden_bloodfeast.gif
https://xcancel.com/arthurmorgantx
Lover of liberty, defender of the 2nd, and stubborn as hell. USN veteran. Unapologetically pro-Israel.
I love how right-wingers have mystified chatbots to such a weird degree of spectacle. To some it’s the Library of Alexandria, to others it’s an actual religious messiah, and the rest think it’s a communist conspiracy. That recent RollingStone article is the most depraved thing I’ve read since the first week Qanon evolved on reddit: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-spiritual-delusions-destroying-human-relationships-1235330175/
edit: Not to mention its cultural role for them. It has replaced right-wing art and they believe it’s the structural future of creativity. They can’t distinguish it from reality when it hallucinates what a star or a hand looks like. The wealthiest person in history used it to generate a nonsense logo for his cybernazi coup to destroy the wealthiest empire in history. It’s such a uniquely fascist technology in a way I can’t call any other product uniquely fascist.
It has replaced right-wing art
What right wing art? Dilbert, stone toss and that guy who created Bane?
Pre-impressionist European patronage, academic, rococo, French art nouveau, advertising and corporate memphis, futurist, surrealist, abstract expressionist, kitsch, hippie and neotraditional movements, the speculative art market and all the postmodernist shit it drove. I’d call right-wing art all the movements and artistic structures which seem to really clash with what we learned from left-modernism and meta-modernism. They’ve always had an antihumanist and antisocial reaction to art as a genuinely human project anyone can create for everyone’s benefit.
Also especially Garfield, like in the old comics where he used to say slurs.
I love how I understand like none of this.
I’d call right-wing art all the movements and artistic structures which seem to really clash with what we learned from left-modernism and meta-modernism.
Wait what we’re we supposed to have learned from left-modernism and meta-modernism?! What even are these movements?
This documentary series by Marxist art theorist John Berger gives a great overview of modernism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXl4U1gFTto
This one, The Shock of the New by Robert Hughes, was my introduction to modernism and really hits at the broad themes of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ne7Udaetg&list=PLFtSvldL7Mh4ismj4BgH33pBR9hbtBkxz
Modernism is the period between 1870-1970~ where art’s value came from doing something genuinely new for a larger movement within it. That might be impressionists challenging the French system of art schools and galleries rewarding failsons, painting a common man’s unique individual perspective of a common thing. That might be cubism where you’re painting in the fourth dimension. The Soviet constructivists were reimagining what a society could look like through art, the futurists were exploring our transition to an industrial society and how that distorts our sense of space and time, the surrealists were incorporating psychology into art, and the dadaists were attacking everything in their society with proto-shitposting. The social realists were making public art with poverty as a theme and the socialist realists were making public art with the dignity of common work and achievements of workers as a theme. In all of these movements you were teaching your audience how to see something new as art which connects them to others.
Most of our great art theory comes from this period because it rewarded you for having a critical outsider perspective. We were learning how to throw out the old European structures that restrained creativity, how to grapple with art in the age of capitalism and industrial reproduction, and how to weaponise art.
Things started breaking down in the 1950s. The period that came next, between 1970-2000~, is postmodernism. If modernism says that value comes from a contribution to a larger project, postmodernism says that there is no larger project or objective truth to be learned and value comes from individual expression in the marketplace of ideas. The postmodern world is ideologically flattened, deconstructed, given a sense of moral relativism, and expressed ironically. Individuals don’t work toward a larger truth but have their own little truth that’s as valid as anyone else’s.
Meta-modernism is what we are, the post-social media 2010-present period where we believe in something larger but use irony to express sincerity. All the products of postmodernism- Garfield, Thomas Kinkade, the New York Times op-ed writers, algorithmic spectacle and atomisation and hyperreality- are things which we attack in the same way the dadaists did with 1910s-20s Germany. The difference between us and the dadaists is that we’ve learned how the old order responds to meaningful new art and we build structures to reinforce the legitimacy of it using their language. That might a website like Hexbear where you have to parse multiple layers of meme culture, ironic doomerism, Maoist Standard English, and historical examples to be able to tell whether a post is sincere or not. It could be a movement like Goblincore where you’re rejecting consumerism and gender conventions to embrace culturally ugly things as organically beautiful in a new biocentric environmentalist framework. It could be Slammer making an entire memetic language out of crude photoshops, each of them being completely true while they’re incomprehensible and shocking to people who don’t know what he’s making. With all of these we’re definitively saying that there is something larger that we can work toward, but that we live in an absurd society requiring an absurdist response tailored to people who’ve grown up in such a fast and profane place.
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2:
that guy who created Bane
The Batman character? Or is there another Bane?
That Rolling Stone article is horrifying. Would definitely be worth making a separate post for
I thought I originally read it on here but it doesn’t seem to come up on our subcommunities. Posted to /c/slop as it’s mass psychic slopification.
This has real “if I were Hitler I simply would have invaded Britain” energy. Purely vibes based analysis that ignores the material conditions and objective reality of the situation.
Saying “use bunker busters on Natanz” makes it sound simple. Just like “manage fallout diplomatically” makes it sound like a single embassy flunky could do it over a weekend.
The reality is that if the US knew where every radar installation was and flew a flight of B21s in a crazy serpentine way to avoid detection and managed to drop dozens of Bunker busters, it probably wouldn’t impact the nuclear program at all. And within 10 minutes every oil field on the Arabian peninsula would be in flames. It’s hard to “diplomatically manage fall out” after Iran single-handedly destroys every Gulf Nation economy. I think they should have nukes, I want them to have nukes, but when you can utterly destroy everyone around you with conventional warheads just by targeting their oil infrastructure, it’s a bit of a moot point.
If “decimating Iran’s nuclear program” were simple, it would have been done already. NATO is not squeamish about conducting an attack like this. The reason it hasn’t happened is because everyone knows military intervention in Iran would make the war in Iraq look like the US SMO in Grenada.
intervention in Iran would make the war in Iraq look
For real lololool. Americans have zero understanding of history, especially in the Middle East. The US lost a war trying to invade Iraq and only won the previous war with Iraq because it had the rest of the world helping. Iran fought an invading Iraq to a stalemate a year after a revolution and several coup d’etats had already caused a bunch of problems.
That was nearly 50 years ago and the Iranians have continued gaining experience fighting against ISIS, Israel, and various insurgencies at home. Their track record is far better than the US, where the DoD and CIA accidentally attacked one another because they were funding opposite sides in Syria.
This is a perfect representation of something I read recently. When you use LLMs in a domain you are not an expert it in, the LLM is scary good, but when you use it in a domain you are an expert in, suddenly it’s transparently total crap.
this is why executives love it, because they are not experts in anything except kissing ass
i’m no expert in military planning but this is still transparently total crap
checkmate, tankie
“Strategy to defeating Iran: just like blow up their defenses bro what are you talking about lmao. Just shoot missiles at them and do cyber stuff or whatever.”
Genius tactical brilliance on the level of Yang Wen-li himself.
How to win a war against Iran:
- use weapons to attack them
- don’t let their weapons attack you
Make offensive and defensive moves at the same time.
War is easy. You just make sure you don’t get shot. I’ve spent the last 40 years not getting shot.
2 weeks to completely decimate Iran
Gives a several month plan
Do rightwingers even read the output anymore?
they were there to be mad not read.
Especially as it ends with continue to monitor for years after
Hey, he typed in “give me a plan that defeats Iran in 2 weeks” why would he need to actually bother reading the response?
Take leningrad don’t siege it.
Iran retaliates with missiles; U.S. intercepts
real “draw the rest of the owl” hours
this person should be given a rifle and then be shoved out of a truck at the Iranian border
how about a disassembled rifle and a printout with instructions from grok about how to put it back together?
I would watch a short film with this as the hook
If i was involved in a complex geopolitical conflict I would simply win
This really reminds me of 2020 playing AI Dungeon where, after I died in a game, I would just tell the AI DM that I would resurrect and come back to take revenge on the enemy who killed me. Then I would simply go rally the peasants to build airships and spread socialism across the world.
AI dungeon was fun
LLMs were awesome when they were dumb enough that a game was as far as you could seriously contemplate taking them.
-
Attack Iran
-
Win the rest of the war
-
Use your diplomacy to manage the nuclear fallout, why didn’t anyone think of this before
im really worried, it feels like every day there’s fewer people ‘in the room’ able to connect the basic dots of ‘Iran has air defences’, ‘Iran has retaliatory capabilities’. this impetuous attitude of US invincibility is going to get a lot of people killed, and unfortunately yankees will only be a fraction of that
Simply bomb Iran while intercepting their retaliatory missiles
My favorite line is “Iran retaliates, US intercepts”
As we all know in war, you can always know you’re safe from your enemy. The Death Star is invincible, don’t think about that thermal exhaust port.
This is especially funny after Iranian 4 generations old piece of shit Shahab class missiles fucked Israel’s missile defense in true promise 2
Weird. Deepseek just said, “LOL! Google Millennium Challenge 2002.🤣🤣🤣”
It’s wild how accurately Grok can emulate real US military planning.
