Why do conservatives love AI art

[@philgodin6493]

They'll look at AI art and think it's real, then look at Moon Landing pics and say they're fake.

[@Fridge_Fiend]

If the moon landings real why isn't Jesus christ eating a humburger next to the US army in the footage?

[@owenkelsey6279]

This

[@erinrising2799]

👆👆👆

[@connormclernon26]

Even if they lived through the Moon Landing and saw it on tv.

[@GalladeTheWarrior]

LMAO

[@dhooth]

do older trump voters even know when an image is ai and when it isn't

[@Eron2828]

"Amen!" Gobbless

[@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot]

No

[@cadenhoxworth7052]

I seriously doubt it

[@noahleveille366]

Absolutely not

[@低端辛吉德]

No

[@PhilosophyTube]

the "not giving a fuck" is part of it I think; it ties in with the question of why a lot of Trump's graphic design and video editing is so bad. It's a rejection of aesthetic standards they see as elitist or establishment

[@kanal7523]

Which is very interesting since, historically, conservatives always appealed to aesthetics/appearances

[@nerdwiththehat]

I noticed this a lot during the Trump presidency, in everything from campaign videos using default iMovie titles, horrible slap-dash Photoshop jobs on "official" statements, the infamous feud with DNI Clapper where he _replaced his Twitter header_ with his statement for some reason??? Meetings with Prime Ministers that got weird, janky Twitter photoshoots with misaligned assets and wonky text... The list of the design crimes goes on and on, not least of which including Melania's famous "#STOPDRUGABUSE" gaffe. It was just a tide of aesthetic sludge.

[@chubbubdreamer6904]

​@@kanal7523It feels like the laziest version of a reactionary movement.

[@Mighty_Atheismo]

MRW my attempt at fascism failz because my attempts at aestheticizing reactionary nationalism fails because my aesthetic is super mega doodoo.

[@smellslikelayne]

@@kanal7523 They still are, but they're appealing to the "This is shit, ergo it's *real*" aesthetic. Fascism is in its grunge era.

[@hitthegoat]

It’s not so much that they love AI art, they just love stuff that appeals to their worldview. Just last week they were accusing Kamala of using AI to “fake” crowd pictures

[@jeremy1392]

But then surely we should see liberals of the same age demographic being just as taken in? And it's true that it's overwhelmingly conservative.

[@justseffstuff3308]

⁠@@jeremy1392Conservatives tend to have a much stronger sense of an ingroup, so they're more likely to accept something that seems like part of that ingroup without questioning it.

[@jvang2293]

They will literally call anything against their worldview fake and tell me Walz forced tampons in boys bathrooms over and over I have grown to hate old Trump supporters

[@Caspff]

@@jeremy1392 I think there are not many "old liberals" because not a single old person is gonna die in the name of lgbt, if you know what I'm saying.

[@AcornSeven]

AiGODS won btw

[@milainheavysyrup]

I think one of the reasons AI art is attractive to conservatives is because the "AI" generation acts as an 'accountability sink'. They get to create extreme imagery that "says what we're all thinking" without that imagery being authored by any particular person. The computer said it, so it must be more true, or more reflective of perceived truths. This kind of dodge is one of the basic modes of conservative political expression - "people are saying", or "there are legitimate concerns" - look we can visualise it, here's a picture! An AI prompter is not an artist, but - depending on whose marketing pitch for generative AI you've subscribed to - either asking a 'super smart friend that knows everything', or mining the collective consciousness via an averaging of everything everyone's ever posted online. If you believe either of these things about generative AI then the images are granted a kind of 'truthiness' by the process by which they are generated. The consumers of this imagery enjoy feeling their beliefs affirmed by a kind of authority you couldn't get from commissioning a human artist, since we know humans can be biased. Conservative prompters love it because their role is obfuscated, they can say anything with a picture in a way they wouldn't be allowed to get away with if they just drew it.

[@CorbiniteVids]

I think this is a major, major part of it

[@JordanManfrey]

And when they get their prompt blocked, they can start subscribing to conspiracy theories about model alignment

[@Valhan177]

I also believe their tendency towards doctrine over relativism plays into it. They crave a precieved "higher authority" to validate their biases. It could be a holdover from hyperreligious thinking or, just plain old submissiveness to authority.

[@Skonces]

I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. Commenting for the algorithm.

[@PhotonBeast]

I think there's also some additional related aspects of it as well. First is the idea that technology being infallible or otherwise the grand objective solution to things. Depending on generation, it could be from the same kind of "Duck and cover/Build a bomb shelter against nukes" sort of thing, or it could be techbro "We are the chosen geniuses who know everything" sort of thing. So, as you said, under those assumptions, it's a given that it's just some 'pure' facts being spewed out rather than a complex auto-complete. Second is just general unfamiliarity as most, if not all, tech prior has been pretty openly fallible; no one was selling perfection nor was there any expectation of it. With generative images and text, there has been a hype bubble around it. Third, I think, is that paradoxical extension of their anti-elitism elitism. Art is hard and while many artists will defend their craft, few will gatekeep. But to them, the idea that something is hard and out of reach feels... offensive, I guess? and so being able to 'take back' art feels good. Because they can 'create' art, well... circles back to our previous points about them holding art up as being this 'pure objective apolitical' thing/

[@hemingshark327]

There's more to it of course, but a real big part of it is simply just that older people aren't tech/internet savy enough to find AI generated images offputting.

[@littlestjoel]

yeah I think that's most of it. but I wonder why it takes "tech savy" to find the images of distorted strange faces off putting

[@AurelUrban]

​@@littlestjoel I don't think it's "tech savvy" that they lack, I think it's just that they're a bit senile and generally old. They don't see as well, they're not looking at details, they're not thinking about things too deeply. I think they don't even get to the point when they could engage their tech savviness if they had any.

[@hemingshark327]

@@littlestjoel That's probably not the phrase I should've used. The thing I was trying to get at is that if you don't approach everything on the internet as low-effort slop (like most of us do) you might be more likely to dismiss these faces and stuff as simple imperfections.

[@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot]

@@AurelUrban the amount of times I've seen my mom show me an obvious fake AI thing on her Facebook and she's not even conservative. She's just 50 and kinda easily fooled by things on the internet.

[@louismatto1046]

​@@littlestjoel Either they don't notice or don't care about those kinds of details. I've always been surrounded by conservatives, and my general takeaway is that most of the ones who even care about art at all still engage with it in a pretty passive way. I can't imagine that they're looking at these images that deeply or even for that long, because they don't look at any art that deeply or for that long in the first place.

[@realbland]

i feel like ai art kind of smooths over the details of images in a way that must be comforting to people who don't care about details in the first place

[@daraghokane4236]

Also with AI art you can distance yourself from the art you make, here is a picture of me talking with a bounch of average americans. Why are they all white I don't know the computer did it. If I drew it I would have had to make the decision to say there all white but now I don't

[@gaetano_kojj]

That's really well put

[@gregautry2421]

You're onto it with this point I think, especially with boomers. I think they want the "experience" of creativity, but with the safety of a consumer product. Like, a good part of their life's experience, especially their childhood is stuff being PRODUCED for them. The biggest example being Disneyland/DisneyWorld. Safe playgrounds that are products produced for them.

[@rinnachi]

this is a great point. i'd go so far as to say it appeals to people who actively resent details, who get ruffled in asking why those sorts of things matter, who cast diversity of detail in art (and society writ large) as divisive, diversions.

[@ConstructBreakdown]

this is a huge generalization

[@newtonswig]

I think the parallel here isn’t art, it’s memes. Boomers missed out on the meme aesthetic and meme grammar. They wouldn’t know how to make a meme out of something, but the sociological need to say “audience, here is a reference” and “creator, I understood that reference and I feel closer to you for sharing it” is still there. This is Bernie on the chair in mittens with everything for the internet-culturally-illiterate.

[@friskjidjidoglu7415]

Very astute observation. I agree

[@KathyClysm]

Seriously I think you might be onto something

[@EnjoySackLunch]

I don’t know about that, but have you tasted this lobster hostage

[@Firesplitter475]

I think it also might follow from a culture of consuming horrendous political cartoons, which are kind of old people memes themselves. If you're already used to the base level reference and fan art 'humor' of Ben Garrison's comics, this weird, alternate reality AI art that just gestures toward something you think is good isn't really that much of a stretch.

[@blake..-]

Woah based

[@LeafseasonMagbag]

Actual design critics have said repeatedly that AI is very aesthetically conservative (not as in the political philosophy but still) AI is designed to give you precisely the average of what you want from everything that came before. That reduces any artistic expression to grey slop. It only understands what’s come before, therefore it will always be quite aesthetically conserving. Fundamentally it can’t innovate because it’s just a very advanced calculator. It doesn’t know what we don’t feed into it.

[@Diogenes-96]

:0 🤯

[@PhotonBeast]

Huh, that's a nice way of phrasing it! It's the visual equivalent of auto-complete.

[@AcornSeven]

Hell nah, what tf blud yapping about? 💀💀💀

[@ilm__0802]

@@AcornSevenin other words, if you feed generative ai with the color red and blue, it can generate red, blue, purple and anything in between. But not the color white, black or green (it can’t generate/innovate new things)

[@LauraLovesHugs]

@@ilm__0802 pretty sure that's a bot, ive seen the same account posting the same reaction to several other comments that were completely understandable

[@grayjaket]

In the conservative Christian world, taste in art is more reactive than anything. Many people in the more conservative Christian world actively push against most art forms, particularly anything impressionistic or abstract. Anything provocative or too modern "isn't art". Realism is prized. Thomas Kinkade paintings are massively popular in the Christian world precisely because of how boring and inoffensive they are. The AI art you see conservative Christians sharing is a particular type of AI art that fits into their frame of what "art" is. To them, the bad, weird details aren't important. It's more about what it isn't than what it is.

[@betterlatethannever4536]

Cosigned. Fundamentally, the Christian worldview says that art should either depict specific and explicit Christian iconography/messages (e.g., Jesus playing soccer with your kid to show that He's Always With Us) or should be used to capture/represent the parts of reality that they believe support their idea about Creationism (e.g., the beauty of the world that God Created For Us). Anything else is Secular Trash that should be avoided. They literally only want marketing and for the marketing to be selling them their own worldview.

[@NickAndriadze]

''Anything modern ''isn't art'' '' But also worth noting that most of modern art sucks too.

[@michaelwarenycia7588]

By "Christian world" you apparently mean "Anglo Protestant", since what you're saying may apply there but certainly not in much of the Catholic or Orthodox world

[@grayjaket]

@@michaelwarenycia7588 yes, I'm referring to the largest representatives of conservative Christianity in America, certainly.

[@7bloemen]

Boomers love art that looks “realistic.” Theyre most impressed from artist who paint in realism or hyperrealism. I think to them there is no diffirence between asking an artist who’s pretty good at rendering to paint Communist Kamela, and asking it to an AI. For boomers the results are equally impressive, and the AI does it much faster too.

[@GenericKen000]

Ironically, this hyper-realistic style is most evocative of Stalin’s Soviet Realism. The western (and CIA funded) abstract art movements that arose as a response to this have never been particularly popular with American regressives. Ironic, sure, but not surprising. Every accusation is a confession.

[@jeffersonclippership2588]

​@@GenericKen000 I guess it's just something authoritarians like since they generally hate creativity, ambiguity, and having to think deeper than surface level about anything

[@warsaw1548]

​@@jeffersonclippership2588No! Realism in painting is not intrinsically linked to "authoritarianism" or right wing politics, and it is much older than Lenin and Stalin. I do not have any reason to believe that conservatives are more partial to realism as a style of painting either, and if they are it is not for the same reasons as progressives. Perhaps, conservatives are partial to realist painters who held conservative views which they expressed in their artwork. This is acceptable to me. On this basis, I would also contend that progressives who are fond of realist paintings, are fond of the ones that express progressive viewpoints. As for the enjoyers of "Stalinist" (Socialist) Realism, and generally progressive realism at that, a group I must admit I belong to, I do not think it is outlandish to say that I (we) enjoy them, because it appeals to us as progressive and democratic people, and appeals our aesthetic tastes in general, and because we simply find them to be beautiful. They are also technically impressive works, requiring a great deal of skill. Likenesses of the human form, face, and even clothing are among the most difficult things to paint realistically, and realist painters who do it well display an extraordinary talent in doing so. Even more impressive, is when a realist painter can create a work that looks to the modern eye like a photograph at first glance. [For example, Vasily Vereshchagin (who died in 1904) 's paintings of the the Taj Mahal and the mosques of Central Asia, they are gorgeous. If you stood before it in the museum you might think that you were standing before the structure itself. An extremely talented painter. Vereshchagin also often displayed progressive tendencies in his work, with his stunning portraits of ethnic people from all around the world, and his depictions of war as depraved, horrific, and causing great suffering, which really stood out at the time, running counter to Tsarist narratives. This all to say, that I think it is wrong to forsake an entire school of art as being indicative of an ideology or unpleasant political trend, because each individual art piece bears the burden of what it's creator believes in, and what kind of person they are. This determines the political character of a work. The Soviets did not enjoy Socialist Realism because "I am ""authoritarian"" and so is this art" (on this note I ask you to view some samples of Socialist Realism and to try to seriously determine in which ways it is either authoritarian, uncreative, or ambiguous.) They liked it because it was beautiful to them, because it reflected everything they thought was beautiful about physical and political life. Because of the great talent and difficulty in the work. Because it was Socialist art. It had all the vibrance, colour, and life, that they felt in their hearts for the revolution. Because in the new world they had begun to build, anyone with a talent could pursue and develop it. They can paint these paintings for everyone to look at, write this music for us to listen to, act and direct in the films that we will watch. Because anyone can go to study their field, or work in culture as they please. Because the revolution has brought literacy and the opportunity to follow one's personal creativity to it's end, when otherwise these great artists would have been miserable peasants toiling in the fields of some pompous provincial landlord day in and day out to survive, never to achieve a fraction of their potential.

[@josepheridu3322]

What's wrong with some quick art? I mean, we all used the generic images that Microsoft Word included. We have fast food, not it is time for fast art.

[@carrotbo9]

@@josepheridu3322 ur trolling

[@lukehawksbee]

"I've already depicted you as the USSR and me as the third reich"

[@dankswank9088]

“Why would you depict me as the chad in this scenario?”

[@jenniferbrien3408]

You remember how that ended?

[@Prismate]

@@jenniferbrien3408 zamn 🥶

[@louis-etiennemessier8003]

​@@jenniferbrien3408 That was cold 🥶🥶

[@Shoxic666]

​@@dankswank9088> thinking genocide is cool Gay

[@XxThunderflamexX]

AI-generated imagry is extremely congruent with Evangelicism. They prioritize immediate, intense emotional reaction, with an active aversion to substance or any sort of reflection on the experience. The dream-like nonsense of the generated images is a selling point, it's almost meditative for them to ignore the obvious technical imperfections. The fact that it commodifies art, that it devalues the human labor to create it, is just a bonus to them.

[@Taradoxxi]

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with this. Extremely good analysis.

[@bahaman19901]

This is just not blanketly true, at least in this one’s experience with and knowledge of christians.

[@omikron6218]

I don't see how people who go to church every week and pray every night and live by the ruels of the bible without getting that much in return for it (at least percievable) would ''prioritize immediate, intense emotinal reaction''.

[@XxThunderflamexX]

@@bahaman19901 I'm not sure I would even call Evangelicals Christians. It's more of a spiritualist movement using the Bible as a prop.

[@InfiniteAnvil]

@@omikron6218 Prayer and worship, especially in a group, are prime sources of immediate, intense emotional reactions. And most conservative Christians either don't know or don't care about following the rules in the Bible that contradict their personal preferences, or they wouldn't be so racist & anti-immigrant (Leviticus 19:33-34).

[@benbreuer4966]

It’s lazy, steals from hard workers, it denies reality, and it shows them exactly what they want to see.

[@carultch]

It makes my skin crawl to see these pictures.

[@SocialDownclimber]

But what does that have to do with the art? /s

[@AcornSeven]

Even though making art is not even work 🤣🤣🤣 Hawk tuah!

[@montybanana]

@@AcornSevenok boomer

[@AnActualPersonInASeaOfIdiots]

@@AcornSeven what is your major malfunction?

[@noahmclaughlin7921]

They 1) Hate creativity and don’t respect the work of artists 2) Make bold claims that rarely align with reality, so ai can let them pretend their world hold any weight

[@kupotenshi]

@@mattp928 it's not an idea, it's a fact. Creativity requires thinking. The AI is not thinking.

[@mattp928]

@kupotenshi the person working the ai has the creativity. it's not just writing a prompt, especially if you're taking care to do it ethically. there are many steps in making good ai art. it's lile when people used to say using a tablet isn't art, the software is doing it all for you... technology is always the interface for creativity.

[@NinaEye]

​@kupotenshi true, the AI has no idea who Kamala Harris is or what the color red stands for or what crowds are made of, ai doesn't even have self awareness

[@geraldjohanssen9735]

@@mattp928This is such a poor defense of ai art. If you have the time to sit on your ass and watch ai art tutorials and type prompts. Then you definitely have the time to pick up a fucking pencil and learn how to draw.

[@cervelmola]

@@mattp928This take is sooo bad. Like artists using tablets also know how to do amazing art analogically, a tool speeds up and facilitates a process, it does not substitute your abilities. Most people writting promps don’t have a clue on how to work art at all.

[@Aloemancer]

Because they hate creativity and artists but want the fruits of it anyway

[@jamesrule1338]

This

[@unduloid]

@@jamesrule1338 That

[@user-rm1jp6hf5h]

There's also the notion that these algorithms can generate anything freely with no regard for morals. And conservatives have no morals.

[@diegomo1413]

And the other

[@AZ-ty7ub]

I think Hbomb was onto something in his plagiarism video about how plagiarists look down upon the people who create the work that they're stealing. Conservatives view artists with disdain and worship capital, so of course they would harvest and steal their work for profit. It's both a smug slap and the face and an emblem of their money god.

[@joebove4]

It’s confirmation bias, pure and simple. They like anything and everything that reinforces what they already believe.

[@eater9494]

@@RealAICCl pepe profile picture (derogatory)

[@eonisone]

​@@RealAICCl there does seem to be a difference in finding community with someone with your mindset vs having a computer spit your own imagination back at you.

[@eater9494]

@@RealAICCl no i have no idea what half the discussion in the comments is i just know a loit of people with pepe profile pictures are annoying and you sound annoying

[@AhmadAneeq]

@@RealAICClno confused cos ur dumb

[@Nobody-df4is]

Maybe it is true.

[@OriginalBigBoy-us8sd]

Honestly, I think the core is very simple: Artists are less valued on the right + AI art is “fine”. It gets the message across, and I think most of the people who liked that post would be confused why you’re looking at it so closely. “Why pay someone money to do something AI can do almost as good? It’s ridiculous to pay for art in the first place.”

[@ewileycoy]

Exactly, the dream of techbros is to have AI do the things that creative people told them were stupid.

[@ambatuBUHSURK]

it depends what art tho, the right loves to pretend they like classical & realistic paintings & sculpting while modern art is just trash.

[@AlexJ1]

Art is transactional to them. You see it in Star Wars fans. They beat down the art into the shape they demand. (then complain about it bringing nothing new to the table)

[@FTZPLTC]

I think some of them are quite bitter that some people had the time and the support to spend time learning a skill that isn't a) immediately monetisable, and/or b) specifically just for making money (or babies if you're a girl). And a lot of them had horrible parents who probably told them that aesthetics were for the queers.

[@Acidicstudios]

@@AlexJ1 Ah yes, because pure, fine art such as the Star Wars sequel trilogy, which was made by liberals for liberals, was so great right guys?...

[@penpendoggo]

THANK YOU!!!!! As an artist, many of us are liberal, neurodivergent, queer, and generally quiet. Growing up in church, I hoped the pastor would mention artists when preaching about future dreams, but they never did. I had to accept that art wouldn’t be seen as "real work", and conservatives often only value explicitly religious art. It’s heartbreaking when people refuse to engage with great art (like Arcane) just because a character is queer, or twist things by calling a Disney movie satanic

[@francescov.3610]

What if a leftist likes to play with AI art programs for fun? Are they now no longer a leftist?

[@Leonkennedy19992]

Im not liberal or conservative but i always find it funny how conservatives glaze and worship Trump and how Liberals have the need to say they are gay every few seconds.

[@l.n.3372]

​@@Leonkennedy19992 I'm liberal and heterosexual. So maybe you don't hear liberals saying they're gay every few seconds.

[@m3371]

@@Leonkennedy19992not only does ‘queer’ not mean ‘gay’ (just any sexuality or gender identity that’s not the ‘default’), it actually adds additional context in that post as it builds upon the notion of being unrepresented and disrespected by the right.

[@PiippoErareika]

Cringe

[@lizchesley6028]

1:06 I’m surprised it spelled Chicago right.

[@juliasanders9155]

Honestly, they probably put it into photoshop and added “Chicago” on there but couldn’t bear to center the flag.

[@lizchesley6028]

@@juliasanders9155 that makes sense. 😂

[@smartjackasswisdom1467]

No, the most recent models get text right most of the time

[@jumpy2783]

They've been getting consistent as of late

[@AcornSeven]

AiGODS won btw

[@TheInterogater]

I think they simply enjoy that it is made to target them. They don't take the time to think critically about what it is or the quality of it, and just immediately identify themselves as the target audience.

[@evansageser6943]

I think this might be the big thing. Like I’m sure there’s something to be said about how many of them are more tech illiterate and thus can’t identify AI art, but I think regardless of recognition, there’s an honest to god craving from conservatives to see media pandering to them, regardless of quality. A lot of the grievances in the culture war is essentially the expression of frustration that they are no longer the central cultural demographic. That people who make art, whether that be for creative or commercial purposes, aren’t interested in making stuff that appeals to the exclusionary conservative worldview. Within such an environment, when you’re no longer the lowest common denominator and indeed much mainstream art and media feels like it is pandering towards others, then you start to feel desperate for anything to fill that void, regardless of quality. Evangelical Christians are particularly known for this. Long before the culture war became a centerpiece of conservatism, the evangelicals were already complaining about secular culture pushing messages onto their children. So you’d see Christian tv shows, films, video games, whatever to imitate the general conceit of what children liked, but baked with a Christian message they found appealing. Most of it was incredibly poor quality, but the message automatically put it leagues above. I think AI art essentially serves that similar niche now for internet memes. It gives them what they want to see, conservative messages bedecking their feed. When they hate everything that the chefs make, they become happy with slop.

[@Purplefoxsoul]

They don’t care if it’s true or even real, just that it makes them feel good when they look at it.

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

@@evansageser6943 ah so thats why they identify so hard with the "red fear" or whatever. because the satanic panic about communism was a thing when they were the main demographic. they just never got over it and broadened their horizons or gained new information. basically they have spend the last 60 years being in the same exact mindset that they were when they were young adults, and now they are around turmp and bidens age and other dinosaurs in their way to the grave.

[@asdkotable]

This is honestly the best reply. The AI art targets them specifically, it's low-effort low-cost propaganda feeding them what they like. Also, they're old with bad eyesight and slowly fading cognitive functions. Also, they're not as opposed to AI art the same way younger people are (most of whom hate AI art on principle), so they're not as careful about identifying AI art, which leads to the AI art becoming sloppier and sloppier, like how online scams are becoming more and more obvious so as to hook the dumbest of the dumb.

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

@@asdkotable oh yeah somehow it went from getting fingers wrong to looking almost real, and now it looks like human centipede. if they generate image of something, they wont try more than once and will just save and share the slop, reinforcing the algorithm to produce more slop.

[@BuddhaMonkey7]

They like it for the same reasons they like Ben Garrison cartoons: they have no interest in the quality of art or ability to recognize when it's lacking. They only care if it expresses opinions they agree with, and they need it to express those opinions in a direct, superficial way, because they also have no interest in or capacity to interpret art.

[@friskjidjidoglu7415]

Definitely

[@jmiquelmb]

The fun thing is that for as comically bad Ben Garrison's "humor" is, he's a legit decent artist from a technical standpoint. His drawing style is iconic, easy to read. It depends on each cartoon though, sometimes it feels like he's not even trying. But it's the content which is bottom of the barrel.

[@Fridge_Fiend]

True but Little Joel has a point that Trump went out his way to make this image ai, he could have easily paid someone to make a better human made piece. Maybe Trumps that big a narrcasist that he wanted to make the piece himself and he feels like he did when Trump Jr showed him how to use ai art

[@michaelwarenycia7588]

​@@jmiquelmbyeah he is good with the pen and ink. And instantly recognizable. Awful messages though. But, talent and good character don't always go together

[@sylviahoward1065]

Conservatives are pretty uncreative and uninquisitive as to why the world is the way it is. They love Conservative AI art because it is so surface level, but comes across as something deep and thoughtful. They hate thinking deeply about art, so AI art is loved by conservatives because they dont have to think about it. AI takes away the need to pay for new artists too. With AI art, Conservatives get to just see a piece of art for 1 second with a surface level message that they get so they can like it, share it and move on to the next thing.

[@kennyobi9871]

Well said.

[@ambatuBUHSURK]

it's not like conservatives paid much attention to art before AI anyways, i think it's much deeper than that, something that alienates not just conservatives but most people from creative thinking & endeavours. AI a prominent symptom of this but not the whole thing.

[@sunbleachedangel]

also most conservatives are just contrarians and most normal people hate AI art so that comes naturally too

[@davixx1995]

Basically, AI art is ideologically and artistically fast food

[@TAZEROXFORD]

“Conservatives don’t get ART.” Bro it’s a political view, being a leftist doesn’t make you an auteur. Get over yourself 😂😂😂

[@schizoidnabokov2567]

I think it appeals to the "the curtains were just blue" people. With real art every detail is informed, wether consciously or not, by the artists's experiences. But with ai generated stuff the curtains really are *just* blue

[@walkingguy6409]

AI art doesn’t exist in isolation; it’s generated based on inputs from humans. Even if AI appears to “just make the curtains blue,” this choice is influenced by a dataset filled with works created by artists who made conscious decisions to paint their curtains blue for various reasons-be it symbolism, aesthetic preference, or cultural context. So, even though AI may not consciously “choose” the color, it draws from human expressions where the color blue had meaning. The AI merely reflects these choices back to us, with humans still deciding how the final product is shaped, presented, or interpreted. Thus, AI art is as much a product of human influence and intent as traditional art.

[@ActionGamerAaron]

The common connection to this aesthetic is having no taste in art.

[@RumchugMusic]

The idea of a type of art being conservative reminds me of Thomas Kinkaide. He was like the artist of George W Bush Republicans.

[@ThePonderer]

I don’t wanna say that conservatism is a philosophy that’s fundamentally opposed to the animating drives behind art as a facet of the human experience, but…that’s probably what it is.

[@hemingshark327]

I'm not sure that a philosophical/moral approach is the best way to figure this out.

[@ambatuBUHSURK]

just as a guess, I'd say it kinda depends on the counter culture rather than what's popular or marketable. conservatives love defending "traditional art" & trashing "modern" art

[@jasonninja55]

​@@hemingshark327 So what approach do you think would work better?

[@cynicismIncarnate]

Okay sure, but that doesn't explain generative images though. They're art, regardless of what people in the comments and on social media will say, and that does say something about how people choose to communicate, no? That images are the go-to method of spreading political ideology in conservative spaces. These generated images are basically replacing meme templates, right? It's the same principle and that's part of how the alt-right spread their ideologies to begin w/.

[@hemingshark327]

@@jasonninja55 something less all-encompassing

[@thunder____]

I think part of it is that conservatives don't consider artists to have done any "real" work so they don't want to pay them. "Real" work in their minds is things like owning real estate, trading stocks and securities, attending a weekly shareholder meeting, being born to wealthy parents, etc. Things like doing 40+ hours a week as a boots-on-the-ground employee, doing hundreds to thousands of paintings, spending thousands of hours practicing a musical instrument, etc are NOT "real" work in their eyes, so they don't think it's morally right to pay those of us who do those things, despite the fact that payment is necessary for survival in a society where basic necessities are locked behind a paywall.

[@josepheridu3322]

Conservatives do appreciate classic art a lot. But art for generic means such as these is not that important for them, so they generate it. It is a perfectly rational view.

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

@@josepheridu3322 hah no they dont, they think artists are parasites.

[@smrndalodz7182]

@@josepheridu3322 Though most of the appeal of 'classical' art is based on the idea that it comes from a previous golden age. And this often ignores the actual meaning behind many 'classical' works of art. They also prefer classical art because the artists were financed by the church or wealthy patrons, so the art was meant to spread status quo messages.

[@xibalbalon8668]

Conservatives like classic art when it's about Jesus and royalty, but they won't hear about Leonardo da Vinci being gay which is something they connect only to modern artists

[@langreeves6419]

​@@josepheridu3322yes, art that is easy to understand and realistic looking. 20th century modern art tends to drive conservatives crazy.

[@bluebark146]

The tech bros pitched ai to them harder than anyone else

[@MrRurounismc]

Did they? do they? Are a lot of boomers really plugged into the latest 'techbro' pitch? Are your grandparents constantly repeating Elon's latests nonsense claims about what X will do? That doesn't really vibe with what I've seen.

[@realMacMadame]

I don't think that's true. My colleagues who are crazy about AI are all younger than Boomers. When I point out its limitations (while still praising what it *can* do), they don't say "Hey, Boomer" back to me but I'm sure they are thinking it. 🤣

[@c0rnichon]

They pitched it to everybody but the prospect of having art without putting in any effort is most appealing to empty humans. That's why people who use art to actually process and express things have zero use for AI.

[@O76-923]

i’ve got a few thoughts on why - on first glance ai images are usually highly sanitized and easy to digest (eg overly smooth skin, simple image compositions, etc). there is a conservative tendency toward nostalgia for an imagined past and ai images can invoke that feeling for this reason. similarly i think there is also a conservative tendency toward superficiality - simple answers and aestheticism are common in conservative worldviews and ai images provide both. ai images also provide a certain type of wish fulfilment (eg ‘they invited trump to the cookout’ or ‘aryan family photo’). the ability to prompt a computer to generate an image circumvents the immense effort required to create and maintain the conservative world they would need in order to make such things reality.

[@antenna_prolly]

Reminds me of the Tim Pool segment where he reminisces over an AI-generated log cabin with a fireplace in the winter, which has an unrealistic giant glass window across two walls that would definitely shatter under those temperatures.

[@monovision566]

Of all the reasons I hate AI “art,” one of the biggest is that it provides conservatives with aesthetic content to sell their bullshit. They’ve never had a lot of artists on their side in any age (at least since the renaissance), so it’s genuinely a new way for them to harness propaganda. Especially when it comes to “photorealistic” imagery-which they cannot even recognize as fake. It’s almost as if their judgment and recognition of reality are broken.

[@GoPieman]

I think the fact that theres a lot of jesus AI art is a symptom that this segment finds something reality-altering about AI art. All depictions of Jesus are to an extent a form of truth to some Christians. Like its so magical to them that, even if the premise of AI images is that you can generate whatever, within their political bubble it seems prophetic and bias-confirming.

[@OneEyeShadow]

Back in the middle ages: Don't you dare depicting Jesus as anything but fully formed and perfect! 2024: Shrimp Jesus goes brrrrr

[@kx7500]

Yeah… this is literal delusional behaviour

[@urinstein1864]

Most important comment.

[@Mekose]

This is probably the most correct and the most horrifying. The far-right is already full of bias conformation, "I'm correct because the bible says so!" or "I read a head-line about a paper a conservative Christian scientist wrote, so what if they weren't published in any journals and the work wasn't peer reviewed, that's just censorship!". Facts and evidence based research have long gone from the conversation in politics and I fear when these idiots start making AI images to generate "evidence" to get angry about. Which is what happened with the Kamala communist image. There's a population of people that will take that image literally and think that really happened because they are so painfully surface level thinkers.

[@scottthesecondcoming]

@@OneEyeShadow cucumber jesus will only spare all cucumber-loving christians during the cucumber rapture where he launches a tactical cuke on the entire world

[@kimarimoi]

I think part of it is they may not see any difference between AI art and human digital art. A while back I heard an older artist talk about how she could identify different painters by brushstrokes and such, but digital art all looks the same. This was kind of baffling to me, since I have no illustration skill whatsoever, but can easily recognize tablet-drawn art styles if I've seen a lot of that artist's work before. A lot of the AI stuff they're posting looks vaguely like old political cartoons--freaky caricatures and surreal exaggerated props--run through a kind of postmodern filter. The AI weirdness that we're seeing may not even register to them, it's often counterintuitive to recognize or requires a sort of intuition that they haven't developed.

[@CountryMouseCityCrimes]

The worst part of all of this are all art "purists" in music who record their albums to computers and use AI plug ins to master the albums. Or using AI to fix motion picture... that doens't seem to be an issue. The only issue seems to be half assed 'illustrators" who think the world owes them a giant payday lolol.

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

yeah, I can see a pic of someones art and the style is immediately recognizable. idk why its so hard for them. sometimes you can even tell whose art was used to train AI. I guess its a boomer thing. can they tell what is CGI and what is not when they are watching the old jurassic park movies.

[@robynsun_love]

anecdotal but I saw a video where an older couple literally freaked out when they saw CG footage of a car hitting a crash dummy bc they thought it was a real car and a real person. So no, the answer is no. 😅

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

@@robynsun_love better not show them blender nsfw then. they gonna think the 10 foot rape monster is real lol

[@PlurCo]

I think it is a scepticism of creativity and comfort with exploitation. Mr Bircham is similar in style.

[@cumulus1869]

I think this hits the nail on the head.

[@Alty-Souls]

That only makes sense if you assume they understand the images are AI-generated and what that means. Presumably, they don't think anyone is being exploited.

[@alexandru5316]

@@Alty-Souls the ones that know (or have a vague idea) how ai works, and how upset creators are about it, illustrate the aspects @PlurCo mentioned very much. they feel like they have a power over the artists: being disliked is adjacent to hated or feared. they feel important or strong through easy means, as sociopaths do with any modicum of power.

[@Alty-Souls]

@@alexandru5316 Do you actually have any reason to think any of that is true, or are you just making up a guy to get mad at?

[@alexandru5316]

@@Alty-Souls i have had many conversations with ai advocates (and even trolls) and have observed from a distance the conservatives' public stance on the issue. i was not contradicting you, i was stating that those people indeed exist. they are a minority, as deeper knowledge on the subject is not mainstream their arguments claim human creativity is similar to ai (skepticism of creativity) and when they see the artists feeling cheated and threatened, they are indifferent or even rejoice in that (comfort with exploitation). some of them enjoy (lack of empathy, sociopath behavior) that the artists cannot do anything to them except complain online because the legal system is slow to act.

[@juannietoacuna]

I'm from Argentina and our new (conservative) president always uploads bad AI generated images to his Instagram account. It's very cringe and unprofessional looking, but his base of supporters seem to like it.

[@magicmagic-vy3vq]

The same thing in Poland. Conservatives produce a lot of this cringy stuff and followers applaud “true!”

[@andrewmulhearn1234]

Love that "CHICAGO" is just in the crowd.

[@the_newt_nest]

A lot of AI art has a weird luminosity that reminds me of Thomas Kinkade. Maybe they unconsciously see the similarity. Old people fucking love Thomas Kinkade.

[@jaysea5939]

I'd completely forgotten going to a Kincaid 'gallery' with my grandparents until just now. I can't believe those were a thing.

[@chriswest6988]

Yeah I think the first place we should look is at what human artists have/had similar styles and whether these people liked those (they did). I think there might be a real causal relationship there too: AI art, at least when faced with certain prompts turns out what I would call a very "Christian Bookstore" style. Gauzy, beatifically lit realist images of people, majestic animals, cozy homes, serene natural environments etc. I would find it incredibly difficult to distinguish between two commercial 1990s paintings of jesus or a cottage in the woods by different artists or to tell either apart from AI. It's not a coincidence that this group of people likes this subset of AI images; the AI was trained on massive amounts of already-homogenized stuff made expressly to be sold to them.

[@the_newt_nest]

@@chriswest6988 Yeah. The kind of art you would see framed in a larger McDonald's in the 90s.

[@ewileycoy]

Generated images do not have a human being going “this is a stupid thing to draw”, previously only political cartoonists would actually be the ones to draw stuff like this and they are universally terrible artists. AI enables shitty ideas that no human with any talent would draw themselves, and we are worse for it

[@silverstorm3729]

That's a really good point - of course conservatives (usually) don't bother to learn art, but they also tend to be embarrassed to rely on someone else to make what they want - especially if that person might judge them for it. AI art completely removes the need to talk to another person to commission something, and I think for conservatives who generally hate humans anyway, that's a huge relief for them.

[@ewileycoy]

@@silverstorm3729 there are some good-ish artists like McNaughton but I think they're the exception that proves the rule. Another example was David Dees (RIP) who must have had some kind of major mental illness but his art is unintentionally awesome

[@kennynelson3189]

It quite literally allows them to fit their narrative into whatever they want. It’s much like when a desperately lonely guy makes an AI girlfriend to fill a void.

[@josepheridu3322]

Not their fault that your talent can be automated.

[@jiyo4245]

@@josepheridu3322 their talent as a girlfriend?

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

funny they made a movie about that few decades ago and now its real. AI gf only 15$ a month.

[@josepheridu3322]

@@jiyo4245 bussy does not count

[@josepheridu3322]

@@KossolaxtheForesworn If AI can replace women, women are sht. If AI can replace generic art, then generic art is sht. True art is very personal and individual... seeing AI as an attack on art is stupid.

[@burgermind802]

AI art is the removal of the individual agency completely from the collective ideology.

[@ratking7383]

Im quite conservative myself and float around the conservative circles online and from what i gather the main reasons for conservatives enjoying AI include: A. Basic spite, a lot of people that dislike AI art and decry it are progressive in their politics B. Being a contriarian. Being anti art world that is nowadays is totally seems to push exclusively progressive agenda (Disney with it's incusivity policies, big gamedev that is mire and more progressive leaning as time goes on) just basic art community that consists mostly of progressives. C. Basic ease of use and lack of conservative artists or atleast conservative artists that are willing to put out their beliefs in public and build their career around being conservative

[@youtoobay]

Good to see an actual conservative weigh in. I likely disagree with your political beliefs and am really glad you are here. Echo chambers don't do any good.

[@JJMcCullough]

I think it’s probably a combination of a few things: - conservatives being less artistically discriminating in general - conservatives responding better to messaging that has less nuance, or at the very least, less pretensions of nuance - conservatives being older and more credulous/delighted with gimmicky novel technology - (this one might be a stretch) conservatives being more religious, and thus more wowed by some of the “miraculous” aspects of AI, namely its ability to create “perfect” visions of the past, present or future

[@AlonWoofPro]

I stopped watching your channel after you said frutiger aero isn't real nostalgia. (Also I'm a millennial too, for the record) also heard you were pro-israel. cringe, dude...

[@JJMcCullough]

@@AlonWoofPro What am I supposed to do with this information?

[@JackieNoBones]

conservatives also have less respect for "not real jobs" (like artists), and much less having to pay for art

[@AlonWoofPro]

@@JJMcCullough Reflect on it, perhaps?

[@JJMcCullough]

@@AlonWoofPro And then what?

[@pipersolanas3322]

I wait patiently for little joel to post everyday which means im going to be sad when the 30 days are up

[@anothergirlonthesubway]

This!! I love hearing about whatever random things are on his mind every day. I really enjoy the routine of it all, like reading a daily column in the newspaper.

[@K._Red]

Ah crap this is temporary huh

[@arkorat3239]

Its a bit wild considering how many of them are so elitist about art. "oooh a red square, it took no effort, old art was better!"

[@Fridge_Fiend]

Holy sh*t I've never thought about that before, that's legit hilarious thinking about it

[@paIeville]

they have no actual respect for artists or the effort they put into their work, they only care if the end result fits their narrow aesthetic of “more realism equals gooder picture.” an artist could spend years of effort and care making a highly expressive abstract collage while an ai user could spend 10 seconds making a roman era style painting and they would prefer the latter every time, without even noticing the fucked up hands 😂

[@ortherner]

It's just a red square though. That's a bad example.

[@-mayo-]

Because conservatives don’t care about art, just the message it sends.

[@Jaspertine]

My theory is that certain people just don't consider creative work to be "real" work. So they convince themselves that AI art is just as good as human-made art, then they can turn around and go "See? The computer can do everything you do, and it doesn't have the gall to want a living wage for it."

[@Metatrudge]

explain right wing artists

[@Jaspertine]

@@Metatrudge Well, I'm describing a phenomenon that I've seen happen on both sides of the divide, so sure, I suppose I could have specified that not all conservatives think this way (and some liberals definitely do).

[@RealPeoplePerson]

The vibrant colors, smooth and round surfaces, and clear messaging are somewhat reminiscent of the art style of ads from 1940s and 50s - you know, the smiling child with red cheeks, holding a bottle of Coca-Cola. Maybe it tickles a nostalgic bone for an imagined good period in America.

[@bahaman19901]

Even without the nostalgie thing this could seemingly be true! The things that used to be in style were much more corporate and smooth than is considered cool now, it makes sense if conservatives have less of an aversion to it

[@potts995]

It’s the Thomas Kinkade effect

[@pigpotty]

These pictures are right there on their computer screens or phones and it’s made of stuffed they are conditioned to like, like Jesus or the American flag or the troops. That’s all. It’s like asking “why does my cat consume so much cat food, and not high-quality cuisine prepared by a world renowned chef?”

[@MrRurounismc]

I do agree with you that its a completely emotional reaction. Things like facebook are skinner boxes for these kinds of people. A million boomers sharing a million bits of nonsense that make them emotional constantly.

[@Measure02]

Well put. It's quick and easy virtue signaling. You don't see them sharing around things that aren't politically/emotionally charged. And considering this is the crowd most inundated with fear anger and "patriotism" is it any surprise it spread like wildfire? Not to mention, the older conservatives I know find it funny to be "triggering," to intentionally post "politically incorrect" things just to upset the "libtards." They think they're "telling the truth" and delight in drinking up the "liberal tears." All things AI art can provide with little to no thought or effort at all.

[@Lily-gj8wb]

My wild theory is that its literally just worse eyesight associated with age. Look at the most recent photo on your phone and blur it up a bit, and it could feasibly what old conservatives see looking at an AI image.

[@confusedowl297]

That could be part of it, but that doesn't explain images that are just unrealistically bizarre like that last image Joel showed at the end with the hamburger

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

I mean if they refuse to wear glasses

[@Lily-gj8wb]

@@KossolaxtheForesworn every old person I know refuses to wear glasses and then complains that they can't see well so I'm willing to assume that this is a common thing

[@smrndalodz7182]

@@Lily-gj8wb This is hard for me to understand, because my vision is absolutely terrible. Even with glasses I can't see so well, and I've been wearing them since early childhood. If little kids are wearing glasses, then wearing them can't make you look old, and if you're actually old as in retirement age, then not wearing glasses isn't going to make you magically look young.

[@120salvo]

Because they like lying. It also helps that they see no value in art beyond the propaganda potential and have no drive to create beyond that. I think it’s no coincidence that a lot of coincidence that a lot of conservative influencers are failed actors and script writers.

[@weskdance]

"art that doesn't give a fuck" is such a good way to say it, had me pointing at the screen like leo dicaprio

[@MahouSoju]

I think it’s a fundamental disinterest in art as a process and art as a creative medium. They believe art should just say what it means and move on. AI really boils down the intent of a piece into its most essential pieces and eschews all fine detail.

[@CountryMouseCityCrimes]

So being an art purist isn't a form of conservativism?

[@josepheridu3322]

You are making a conservative case for art, LOL

[@LayZKimochi420BlazeIt]

There's no critical thought required both in its creation and its consumption. Also conservatives once again imagining they live in a world that I fucking wish we did

[@DizzyEyes94]

No that Kamala image does kinda go hard but like in a very pitiful and self-serious way

[@trippingthelight]

that crowd size, tho

[@Urza9814]

Human artists want to create new things. Conservatives do not like new things. They just want repackaged mashups of concepts they already know and understand, and that is exactly the task that AI excels at.

[@altrogeruvah]

Conservatives always need more than reality can provide

[@Arithryka]

pretty sure they like it for the weird shiny kitsch aesthetic it shares with thomas kinkade paintings

[@MrRurounismc]

Now that's an interesting connection. They love that shit too.

[@chrisball3778]

Supply and demand. Many of the consumers of these images aren't even aware that they're AI. Artists skew liberal. Old people skew conservative. There's an under-served market for conservative dross in the art space. There have always been a minority of Ben Garrison type artists willing to supply it either through genuine conviction, or just for pay, but not enough to meet the continuous demands of social media. AI is able to fill that gap, and its audience has low standards.

[@absurdbird3556]

Because they've never had visual representations of their mad beliefs and conspiracies before. It's *almost* as good as evidence.

[@billweasley1382]

Just like the pictures Kamala released showing "crowds" at her rallies. That's almost as good as actually having crowds, I guess.

[@Eeppydeepy]

They’re finally able to live in their delusion like it’s reality. Look, look! It’s in a picture! It has to be real!

[@absurdbird3556]

@@billweasley1382stop being weird

[@VictoryGoth]

Conservatives are also less likely to acknowledge making art as "real work" and are thus less likely to be willing to pay for it.

[@edwardspencer-small7021]

They hate the concept of people being paid to make art, so they take advantage of the one from of "art" that doesn't need to pay anyone

[@Alex-cw3rz]

It's because they are looking at the image without their glasses on so don't realise how bad it looks

[@escottronic]

yeah this is what i think too, they're probably just scrolling fast with bad eyesight, i dont think its cuz conservatives are less artistic or something

[@realMacMadame]

🤣You made me snort.

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

try to show my mom an image on my phone first she tries to look at it with glasses, then without glasses, then she puts glasses back on and tries to look it from different distances for few minutes before she hands it back to me and Im sure she couldnt see it once. idk how she uses phone if she cant see the screen.

[@BeanoNintendo]

I don’t think what you said about boomers being the first to embrace AI art is true. I think that, when AI Art first started being readily accessible, it was our generation messing around in DALLE and creating content based around ChatGPT. I think that AI started off as a fun novelty and it was only after if became good enough for the untrained eye to mistake it as something legitimate that it caught on with the boomer crowd. Once it became realistic enough to be passed off as legitimate, I think a lot of millennials and gen z went “Oh. This has some serious potential to take away jobs and stuff. I’m not on board for that” but boomers don’t think or care about that. In fact, I think a lot of them think AI art is real because they DIDN’T see its evolution from barely recognizable scribbles on DALLE to what it is now. So their eyes are untrained… thank you for coming to my TED Talk

[@BadgerCommander]

Yeah, I think it depends on what you mean by "embrace", if you are using it interchangeably with "use" then absolutely agree. But if we mean it to be "This is good and I like it" I think Boomers are now leading the charge. I was in an art museum in Amsterdam that featured some AI art, and apart from some shitposter appreciators all of the 'youth' were ignoring it. Admittedly Anecdotal evidence but that's just what I saw.

[@SaberSin-mu4kt]

The same people who made fun of boomers for not 'getting with the times' are now freaking out about the potential technological dystopia that lies ahead of us. You reap what you sow.

[@joshwenn989]

At least from my perspective people only seemed to start disliking AI art a little bit after that 'Dark Souls as an 80s movie' video blew up. There was a bit of a pause before artists suddenly started realising that, no, they _weren't_ immune to the automation that's been gradually affecting every single other sector human existence for the past 200-ish years, and having that assumption completely and instantly upended is largely the reason why AI art is still generating so much drama.

[@BadgerCommander]

@@joshwenn989 Ah, okay, for me most of the people younger than me saw it as a curiosity, unless they were professionals in the field (in which case they rightly freaked out)

[@BadgerCommander]

@@SaberSin-mu4kt Thank you for a very weird take.

[@dotwia2944]

Might be an overly pretentious take, but I think it has something to do with the inherently conservative nature of 'AI'. It can't truly create, only remix and reshuffle that which has come before; it's the embodiment of conservatives' obsession with an imagined, glorified past and the idea that history and tradition holds all the answers.

[@BigOwl51]

Not to glaze Quentin Tarantino but the scene where Hitler is watching that movie in Inglorious Basterds is the most accurate depiction of conservative “art” I’ve ever seen in my life. It’s completely artless and passionless. It serves no purpose other than to communicate their conservative ideology and their hatred of minority groups.

[@BigOwl51]

Not to glaze Quentin Tarantino but the scene in Inglorious Basterds where Hitler is watching that nazi film in the theater is the most accurate depiction of conservative “art” I’ve ever seen in my life. It’s completely artless and passionless. It’s boring and flat, and serves no purpose other than to communicate their hatred

[@Alty-Souls]

That would only make sense if the conservatives knew that the images were AI-generated, which they presumably mostly don't. I don't think that the conservatives like AI images because of how they're made, a process they don't know is happening and don't understand anyway.

[@alphasword5541]

Nah

[@CountryMouseCityCrimes]

I feel the same way when I see another pen and paper type artist just ripping of Derek Hess.

[@hackman-hackman]

He’s doing it to cast doubt on ALL images. “If he is posting AI images, the others are too. “

[@OscarOSullivan]

The funny thing is the stylistic origin of AI “Art” is socialist-realism. I once as a joke got various images of Lord Lucan riding on Shergar generated for the laugh of it. But AI can never replace the brilliance if the human mind.

[@Kira1Lawliet]

I could come up with some insightful explanation of why conservatives love AI art, but I think when it comes down to it, it's really just that conservatives past a certain point are anti-human. They like AI art because it represents the same hollow artificial emptiness that's in each of their own hearts. They despise expression and creativity, it makes them uncomfortable. They want art to be a reflection of state values and universal (often religious) truths, and what better way to manifest such art than through machines that don't have any pesky things like unique perspective or subversive thoughts? They don't want things to change or grow, so they despise life itself as a necessary engine for change and growth. They want to live in a hyperbolic time chamber where everything always stays the same and nothing disrupts the sanctity of the familiar, regardless of how bad it is. I know it sounds reductive, but really the more you look at conservatives/fascists, the clearer it becomes that they are just anti-human and anti-life.

[@TheIgnoramus]

Anti-*FREEDOM* or in other words, anti-change, which is itself, what feeds life.

[@d.optional3381]

Spot on

[@thejuiceking2219]

i think it's simpler than that they view art the same way they view everything else: a commodity, something to be bought and sold. with ai art you can make more quickly, more art means more commodities means more can be sold

[@Kira1Lawliet]

@@thejuiceking2219 I think that's certainly a part of it, but these aren't mutually exclusive explanations. In fact, I think they're complementary. Commodification is, essentially, anti-human and anti-life. When you commodify something, you're expressing the desire to prioritize something's quantity over its quality, because commodification in a modern context entail mass production which incentivizes quality reduction. You're de-prioritizing the value of the thing you seek to reproduce. A painting by Michelangelo, for instance, is a glorious work of art, but when you make a million slight variations of it to produce for the purpose of market consumption, then that work itself starts to become much less significant on its own, kind of like how those works get cheapened by being printed on gift shop mugs and T-shirts, etc. There's no value or meaning given to something by doing that, it only takes value and meaning away. It dilutes it. Which is the antithesis of art, and of life.

[@bahaman19901]

this is again an overwrought explanation about how conservatives are fundamentally inhuman which seemingly just comes from a lack of understanding and relation to any conservatives who you are close enough to to see them as real beings. conservatism is intensely human

[@westvirginiaglutenfreepepp7006]

Trump "Kamala used AI to give herself a big crowd" Also Trump *uses AI to give Kamala a big crowd

[@PunishedKrab]

Aww, you beat me to it!

[@masterplusmargarita]

For the same reason the majority of (good) artists are progressive - conservatism is fundamentally opposed to the things that makes art good - a willingness to think critically, to reinterpret and to question and to provide different perspectives. AI art provides a facsimile of the outcome of the artistic process without requiring all the uplifting things about the process itself that conservatism is opposed to.

[@CountryMouseCityCrimes]

Technically being progressive would be embracing all potential tools and avenues to create. Becoming hyperfocused on being a purist is actually a backwards conservative value.... probably deeply engrained as most Americans are not progressive and have been raised in a very conservative manner.

[@josepheridu3322]

Are you sure drawing a line on a blank canvas is "art"? No wonder why they prefer AI.

[@kingcrimson4133]

​​​@@josepheridu3322You're like a person who says rap is bad because all they talk about is guns and women. You're singling out a single example of something incredibly broad and making it out to be the whole. Doing so betrays your distaste towards the people who create and enjoy it and also your utter lack of knowledge of what is being created and enjoyed. To you, the entire deep world of modern art is a single line on a white canvas, and you don't know anything more because you're fundamentally uncurious about actually exploring what else is out there. You just want something to feel like you're superior to. That's sad.

[@enlargedquack]

Because they push away people with actual creativity and skill.

[@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation]

I've seen conservaties say they support AI because "it's a way to fight the woke monopoly on media". I think that must have something to do with it... which is depressing.

[@jamesrule1338]

I wish Kamala was that cool.

[@kennynelson3189]

Funnily enough Trump would have a reason to be scared if a communist could fill up an arena like that.

[@JuzALilGayBean]

Image could go pretty hard if it was actually drawn by a real person

[@Ria-sd2ex]

Yo, same😔

[@kx7500]

Depending on what kind of communist. The “communist” MLs are arguably more right wing than most liberals.

[@stoodmuffinpersonal3144]

Right? Like f*ck

[@nigeladams8321]

Conservatism and art has historically been about interpreting art through purely aesthetics. They don't value any of the other aspects of art such as interpretation

[@liammarshall-butler3384]

I think that can't be true, because the question is why are they willing to accept an A.I. image that looks bad, when they could get an artist to make a poster that expresses the same idea, but with a better aesthetic.

[@joek81981]

I think its more utility related. Its popular because it can made to lie to get to an end. Thats all that counts to them: the ends. Theres no employee to say "no thats dishonest and i wont draw that for you".

[@JessicaRainey970]

AI art elicits an immediate, visceral reaction that is not subtle and does not care about anything (being a non-human, and indeed non-sentient, creation). To an older conservative, whose world is remembered as a vivid haze of curly haired glowy white Jesus paintings, suburban mowed lawns, store brand hot dogs at a barbecue, John Wayne (they can't remember any of his movies, no - just John Wayne) and white-only families wearing light colored clothes, such generated material would feel like the truest expression of the world; the closest thing you can get to looking into the face of their God.

[@Mackerdaymia]

Because it's the only reality that resembles theirs

[@xxplumplumxx]

there is a separate internet culture in which boomers are the avant-garde. email chains, political facebook groups, comment section of a local news website, candy crush etc. i see ai slop as an extension of this culture. one thing that worries me is how much boomerposting did ai have to scrape to arrive at this distinct artstyle. it's like under the tip of web that we experience there is an iceberg of boomerposting. the sheer volume is sublime

[@tarvoc746]

My observation is a different one: It's very specifically _Bourgeois_ conservatives who love A.I. art. In contrast, pretty much every working class conservative I know at least claims to loathe A.I. art.

[@mlp4eva]

Not really, people who are fascist often hate artists and want to create without needing creativity.

[@SaberSin-mu4kt]

@@mlp4eva You guys literally are incapable of creating anything worth of value other than you're "subjective" abominations you call modern art that gets trashed on by the whole of society. I mean, it makes sense really. You guys are against the concept of physical labor, not just because y'all are spoiled children who get easily uncomfortable by any sort of adversity, but also because you think anything that causes any sort of physical labor is fascism. Masculinity is fascism, competence if fascism, anything that calls for the disenfranchisement of the "incompetent" is fascism. Really now, the only people who are capable of making real art are not just the people with creative minds, but the people who are disciplined in their craft. Art is a skill, it takes time and effort to master, but of course none of y'all have the mental fortitude to do any of that, so you take the easy way out and say "art is subjective" so you can justify your own inadequacy.

[@TheDanishGuyReviews]

They have wilted imaginations, so they turn to something doing the imagining for them. They can't go to people, because they want money.

[@cooltwittertag]

Having a president that is too senile to distinguish ai from real life will be a disaster

[@abbiearcher4716]

I don't think I need to watch the video to explain it: 1. They don't wanna do art and don't wanna even learn GIMP or photoshop 2. They're too cheap to pay actual artists. 3. Most artists won't even take their commissions.

[@noel737]

Non-cynical take: I think AI tech in general is appealing to older generations because it’s the first thing that’s really approaching the visions of the future people had in stuff like the Jetsons or the og StarTrek-tech that was more than a tool or appliance, it was a servant; this is the stuff that the older generations grew up on. You could argue that such visions extended to Gen-X and Millennials. But in these cases, as the Internet and hardware advanced so quickly and changed society so dramatically, it became apparent how far we had to go to reach such visions-if ever. I don’t wanna give our generation (Millennials) too much credit, but I suspect younger generations are also more knowledgeable about AI and how much of a marketing ploy it is, or more aware/concerned about its effects on labor.

[@robinvik1]

The end state of conservatism is wearing VR googles in a pod getting fed unreal nightmare visions 24/7

[@TheJ_G]

Because they’ve had a contentious relationship with reality ever since they invented alternative facts to protect their world view.

[@TheGooGaming]

I think they like it because the simplicity of the message, where it straight up shows communist kamala with no room for interpretation or irony, plays to the way political cartoons looked / were used back in their generation. There is no nuance, it is straight up just a grotesque depiction of your opponent with some simple caption that you'd find on a tabloid; AI does basically the same, but instead of a black and white drawing, its more like a real image you'd find scrolling social media; and it looking more or less realistic or more or less "AI generated" doesn't matter, stuff like communist kamala isn't supposed to fool people, it can look bad, the point is just putting the mockery out there; just the same as classic political cartoons that had horrendous artstyles.

[@minussoup9183]

AI art was neat and fun to play with in its earliest form, now it feels like a blight on the internet.

[@andriypredmyrskyy7791]

Nice to see little Joel pivoting from his lucrative Chess career into political commentary. Based, unlike Fischer.

[@TheMusicRoomWA]

Yeah Fischer's turn to commentary was the exact opposite of based: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Fischer#Antisemitism

[@kajamatousek247]

​@@TheMusicRoomWAHoly based ?

[@DaveGouda]

@@TheMusicRoomWA yikes

[@Alex-cw3rz]

My dad who's in his 70s was really excited to show me the AI music his friend had made. I think it's just the fascination that a computer made it maybe. He was in a rock band, when he was 18 - 20 with the guy who made this AI one and they still do jam sessions from time to time and my dad has been writing a song recently as well. Yet is really excited about AI music. He's a christian although doesn't go to church and is not a Conservative, as he's not particularly political and from the North of England.

[@frocco7125]

Well at least he's having fun with it.

[@Eeppydeepy]

I have to agree that some part of me finds AI art/ music/ writing kinda interesting, but what stops me from fully enjoying it or even being interested and willing to engage with it is that it’s never good unless there’s some level of skilled human involvement. Like “BBL Drizzy” got popular because it was kinda good, but it had a comedian working on it with intent. That guy had a vision for what he wanted and was able to manipulate it to get it there. He didn’t just type in some keywords, hit generate, and publish it. Just speculation of course, but I’d have to assume that your dad and his friend have some level of skill with music, having been in a band and all, so they’d would be able to hear inconsistencies and other weirdness that AI puts into the song and be able to fix it into something good. In that case, AI art with intent is much more compelling than AI art without intent, or at least anything other than putting out objectionable garbage to soothe your voters.

[@jijitters]

Christian = Conservative btw, no need to feign distance from political views.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

@@jijitters it really does not. Even in the USA over half of dems are Christians, only certain sects in the US give an indication i.e. evangelicals. In the UK there is no correlation at all.

[@Tamis2Hamis]

Boomers have first-hand experience with visual media changing dramatically over their lifetimes. Newspapers, movies, television, the internet; each of these presented the world in different ways and could be a way to expand your understanding or uncritically accept / reject as reality. AI art is a near limitless rabbit hole where you can find or create any reality you want.

[@Eddison33]

I think I know the main reason. Hear me out - for them, it's just a funny (positive) picture! It's not that they particularly like the style, it's not that they think AI makes art available, it's just that they will not overthink it. "There was no effort put in its creation", "it doesn't look realistic", "it's tasteless", "look, they have 6 fingers", "AI leaves artists out of job" - they don't think deeper into it. My relative sends me holiday wishes stylized as postcards, and most of them are AI-generated. I know for sure: she sees a picture with a puppy and kind words, she experiences positive emotions, and then just shares it. She could have distinguished that it's AI-generated, but she didn't care about it.

[@neshie9724]

this, pretty much

[@Tomartyr]

They like treating AI as an infinitely wise seer capable of discerning and expressing the truth in an otherwise confusing reality. They also like complaining whenever it produces something that doesn't exactly match their worldview.

[@LukasFarabee1987]

I think a big part of why it's so popular with that portion because it's near instant gratification.

[@anonymoussaid9970]

Conservatives hate artists, they always have, and conservative grifters, advertisers and politicians have always lived off creating a false reality that looks real to people who aren’t very picky abt details

[@Alty-Souls]

That explains why they would tolerate it, but not why they would like it. The conservatives sharing the photo presumably don't know that it's AI.

[@SleepyMatt-zzz]

Like every tech bro who loves ai, it's because they are furiously envious of people who actually have enough drive to create something. It's like when they kept saying that ai was going to "democratize" art making. Art was always democratized, anyone can create art, you just have to put in a little effort. Conservatives are not creative, because being creative involves taking risks and asking questions, which does not mesh well with an ideology that demands conformity.

[@harrietdrums]

God I hate the AI tech bros so much. Art has literally never been as democratised as it is right now, using just my phone I could shoot and edit a film and upload it to the whole world, I could compose music on it, I can do digital drawing or take photos or make a stop motion film. Nevermind the vast possibilities of just a pencil and paper. These people have had the tools to make art this whole time, what they want from AI art is either a) the ability to get art and not pay for it or b) the ability to create low effort products to try and make a quick buck. They likely see art as a skill that you either have or you don't, so this feels more "fair" to them. They don't have any skill or talent or creativity or perseverance to improve themselves - they just want results as quickly as possible. They don't understand that you'll make a ton of things you hate before you make something you're proud of. They don't want art, they want a product.

[@alexknight1361]

They see art/media as a liberal institution that blocks out conservative viewpoints. AI Art is seen as being able to detach art from the traditional means of creating art that runs through liberal institutions as part of being able to democratize the creation of art. Also, the kinds of people who don't understand what makes AI art worse than traditional art (or can't even perceive the level of detail required to understand why it is worse to begin with) tend to be the kinds of people who are conservative.

[@elfpi55-bigB0O85]

AI art and your relation to it exposes people who were either born without a soul or lost them on the way to their current position of wealth.

[@croakinc3670]

Calling AI images art is honestly just inaccurate

[@patrickbateman1660]

Cope

[@croakinc3670]

@@patrickbateman1660 Oh my god, patrick bateman told me to cope for commenting, so edgy

[@patmcleod248]

Why don't videos like this ever trend?

[@Onoesmahpie]

Because the trending section is usually full of stuff that 8 year olds watch

[@kashiichan]

​@@OnoesmahpieI'm pretty sure patmcleod248 was making a joke. Comments like that tend to be rife amongst conservative spaces online.

[@TheAirBear2000]

Scarlett Johansson Beautiful cabin crew

[@leaffinite2001]

Big youtube keeping little joel down

[@csm6701]

He make video with his hand

[@itselisha222]

I do like the three-legged soldier handing that guy a giant burger.

[@JaceTout]

Its because real art is usually made from a left perspective because art is usually trying to cause change.

[@joekrampus1154]

Maybe it’s just that conservatives can’t stand the idea of paying an artist to make art