If you think of mid-late '22 NAFO visual culture as reiterating Dadaism & Lettrists in its disruption tactics (it's OK Mr. Jarvis, I know you don't know, go read an art history book)
You could see where NAFO art is going as reiterating that same progress.
He has a little official shirt (I don't think a lot of fellas actually have that).
The bat literally says "SANCTIONS", this was the forger's interpretation of a sanctions fella, which is, when you think about, basically the only visual solution for that.
It's not like you can, I don't know, make a little picture of a shiba inu sanctioning Khameini, what would that even look like.
The solution they chose creates a certain self-sufficiency in the result. Like, whatever that fella is in, it's a sanctions joke now.
Personally, I love the florks, I'm really interested to see how they're going to develop aesthetically.
There's something in Chinese calligraphy called (and this is annoying, everything sounds annoying & mystical in Chinese aesthetics) the "bones" of a brush stroke
In Japanese painting a similar concept recurs as a sort of bold, decisive line that expresses and evokes, just by the way it's drawn.
Great example, Hokusai's painting of Daruma. We're not seeing, like, the fifty rejected examples of the key brush stroke that Hokusai rejected.
This is something close to the flork aesthetic, I think.
Memes in general already arrive at excellence through reduction; you have about fifteen words before people run out of attention, and unless there are naked people or guns, only a few seconds of looking at an image.
Memes are like sculpture. Structure emerges through subtraction; elegance is a matter of reduction. You carve away to get at the essential message to make a really viral meme.
This is something that the florks sort of capture, I think, in their calligraphic simplicity.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
You don't want praise from idiots (that's a recipe for tragedy) so, you know what, folks?
When we argued, I think Ellsberg was right about American exceptionalism.
And he still is, in the cases he cites. We weren't a force for good in the world. America was irresponsible.
(🧵)
Good example here, American nuclear planning.
Here's just one example: does anyone know what this is?
The official, boring, designation is the M-29 "Davy Crockett" Weapon System. It is a smoothbore, recoilless gun designed for a very specific task.
The bulbous object at the end is the M-388.
It is one of the smallest nuclear bombs ever built, ~10-20 tons in yield; some devices like the W54 Special Atomic Demolition Munition reach 1 kiloton yield.
What you're looking at is the world's first man-portable nuclear weapon.
This is going to make sense to, like, five people, max, but:
TL;DR, bigots act if the mere fact of your existence brings shame to some collective you both belong to because of the politics of abjection, also useful in countermeasures.
It makes sense in Bataille's terms.
(🧵)
To characterize right-wing extremist discourse as the politics of hatred is evocative and maybe politically useful, but it's not strictly speaking correct.
Hatred assumes a fixed subject; the targets of right-wing extremists shift rapidly, fluidly and seemingly without reason.
So, what happened to critical race theory, anyone remember that? Are we just... what, not talking about that anymore now that the book-burners have trans folks to justify their bibliophobia (fear of books)?
What it's really about, I'd argue, is the politics of abjection.
I used to be in "progress guilds" in World of Warcraft back in '06-'08.
Back then, that meant 50+ people playing 40+ hours of video games a week to beat stuff before anyone else; this is why our server opened Ahn'Qiraj first.
The leader of one told me their secret once:
(🧵)
The people who end up being leader aren't the best players, or the most attractive, or even the most fun to watch, they said.
It isn't like vtubers, where you win if you have the cutest filters and stupid shit all going off on your screen at once.
No actually it's much simpler, they said.
It's just the one who talks the most, that's the one who ends up leader, every time. It's being the one who talks.
You don't have to be right - and some of the largest guilds I knew had some of the dumbest leaders.
The message that Musk & the right are sending by targeting Hotez is
"you can be bullied by the world's richest man if you dare to speak out against his lies".
Libs of TikTok does this a lot. This is a new scale.
If you don't reject it, I'd argue, you're letting it work on you.
Trump does the same thing with Strzok and Fauci and to this day, you can find even reasonable people who don't like Fauci for no reason other than disinfo they heard on Fox.
Rejecting it isn't about Hotez any more than it's about standing up for a G-man or a CDC dude.
It's akin to rejecting transphobia and homophobia; you don't have to be trans or gay to understand the danger of a bunch of f**kin' idiots running around fearmongering against whatever arbitrarily defined group they can find.
This is the same deal and it's absolutely inarguable.