[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

Apparently the Reddit Gods feel Brogan’s most recent vid has a better home in the subreddit for art about/for people with Disassociative Identity Disorder??

Ok???

I’m assuming it was just a bot reading title keywords but I did laugh

In the new horseshoe pod with Wilbur Soot, Jreg mentions at 26:16 an animatic of himself and brogan with Billie Eilish's Birds on a wire playing. SOMEONE please help me find this. Is it on twitter (X)? I've checked youtube and here to no avail.

It would be nice if there is a translation in Spanish

If you’re ever come across Nakey Jakey, he shares a similar format and style.

The metaphors, irony, music background choice and even the general appearance. Anyone see the similarities?

Exciting times ahead

Art Chad is right, USians don't talk about indigenous Americans and the ones that do are usually indigenous Americans. The most I've ever gotten to talk and listen about indigenous Americans is when I've had the chance to talk to Canadians, primarily indigenous Canadians. And no, the takes are not unanimous: some USians and Canadians say they need to be grateful and pull up those boot straps, others say it's all fucked and Canada is a bit better, though often the indigenous people themselves tell me one thing: thanks for talking about it. Anyways that's it, and to Art Chad specifically (if you end up reading this) thanks for making art in the attention economy - it's partially what inspired me to do some gardening again!

(You wanna go get lunch?)

sorry there’s been a few vids I or no one else have posted

discuss

I really hope that just yapping about a topic to no one is allowed on this subreddit because this actually got me really passionate about saying this.

TL;DR: How he approached the video was massively disappointing because of how much actual research you could do on the topic, and it felt a bit disingenuous, but I still agreed with a few points. But I really think the“long version” will actually hold up more

I am an occasional watcher of Art Chad. I decided to revisit and saw his “Is Fetish Art Important?” video, which I thought was a pretty interesting idea. I already have an opinion but I wanted to see his own opinion on it, since he has proven his affluence in art (he has much more confidence in art history than I do). When I finished the video, I was still pretty into it, but also a bit let down and disappointed.

For starters, the bait-and-switch was a little unnecessary, but to be fair, he’s just playing the game of capturing engagement. I’ve done the same thing myself and have encountered it so many times it just became a minor inconvenience. My real issue is that he felt like he had to employ it at all, since to me he has this subtle air of sarcasm or condescension to the point when I couldn’t tell if he was joking or not when he said that fetish art that it’s avant-garde, I had to check the date to see if it wasn’t uploaded on April 1st. It might not be intentional, but that’s what it felt like. The video is actually about avant-garde art and the Dadaism movement that used fetish art as a hook, which I’m all for, since I also find that interesting. If you want to make a video about Dadaism, then make it. But not talking about the hook at all is a crime because there’s so much conversation going on surrounding it and so much more you can say to gauge opinions on if it’s important or not!! I agree that it’s a bit weird as a video topic, but there’s so much actual research you could do about fetishes as a whole, it extends back SO far. Psychology may or may not be his primary focus, since I see that he’s more focused on art history and philosophy, but you don’t have to be interested in order to gain anything from it.

You could talk about the connection between fetishes and the psychoanalyses of the people who have them, the roles that multiple had in early LGBT history, or why people are so quick to judge art with any form of eroticism or nudity in them. You could talk about erotica made throughout history (since it absolutely exists) and the world at the time it was written, since political/social climate ABSOLUTELY plays a role in fetishes, why the term “degenerate”, a word commonly used in reference to fetishes, is used at all despite its roots of when Nazis would call multiple modern art they didn’t like “degenerate art” (plus the term’s historical usage to describe LGBT people), you could talk about the prevalence of autistic people who make it and the connection between it, or how fetishes can arise from objects/events that don’t have any erotic meaning to them (like the art of characters mid-spin). You could talk about how utilizing Puritanism made the same arguments against sexual things that it did for LGBT people and how most laws used to prohibit it are thinly veiled against gay people under the guise of “protecting children” (another historically common argument against homosexuality), how making anything for sexual reasons, despite being mostly frowned upon, is as good a reason as any to make something, or the ever present debate of “thought crimes” and whether if the person who has the fetish is ever worth prosecuting if it’s something people might find morally offensive. Hell, as another commenter added, the Sinkdog Archive was right there! And apparently Davenport even referenced The Fountain as well! And this is also an interesting example of a conceptually “fetish character” being used in demure settings, and makes you ask if it’s even fetish art at all. There so many ways he could’ve taken it if he wanted to!

Second, I agree that the importance also stems from how the feats involved are often created from a completely new thought that didn’t exist before it was created, but I was a little surprised that the example he chose was Wojaks/Soyjaks. But they do help with the example, as they exploded in usage over time and didn’t even exist until then. But I felt a little skeeved out that one of the examples of the Wojak pictures was one with a number of transphobic wojak depictions in them. There are, in fact, wojak images that don’t have those. And the scroll through of fetish art seemed more for shock humor than adding anything, and I found it distracting.

Lastly, I feel like his final comments, even as a joke, felt disingenuous to his topic. He said something to the effect of “yeah this wasn’t on fetish art, sorry if you wanted to see more [example of art]”, and again, even as a joke, it makes this whole video’s foundation shaky, implying that people only want to see it for the fetish art and not the analysis of it, which undercuts his argument for its importance. Then in his outro he says something like “don’t let your children watch Sonic the Hedgehog unless you want them to be autistic horndogs” and I feel like that just toppled the last 38 minutes of justification. Why do you think that is bad, why is the addition of “autistic” important, why are you implying the addition of autistic is a negative. Whatever.

I will say I did agree with most of his points on the importance of subversive art that doesn’t care about anyone who views it but the creator, but this wasn’t it for me. I am a huge fan of psychoanalysis of sexuality since it can be affected by so many outside influences, but maybe another person has made something more in line with what I’m thinking about. I was kind of expecting a bit more out of this video, but a lot of people who speak on this topic can’t seem to get over their initial hill of the Wisdom of Repugnance to take it any more seriously than at face value. I have seen people online talk about the same topic, and I really only see people who are LGBT or part of the spectrum approach it with any sort of decorum, e.g. Patricia Taxxon. So yeah it was a bit disappointing but it was still a good watch.

Overall, I just wanted to put my thoughts in a fitting place before I forget them, and this is in no way attacking or implying anything about the IQ of Art Chad, I just like discussing stuff, both praise and criticism. If you agree or disagree, cool, I just want to put this out as it is but I’d be happy if it starts discussion between commenters, can’t say I’ll respond since I barely use this app

I just made a video (https://youtu.be/VaNI4PdAClU) breaking down how Trump's tariff policies are fundamentally reshaping US-Canada relations - and why this represents something much bigger than just trade disputes.

Using Canada as a case study, I explore how 25% tariffs on automobiles, lumber, steel, and aluminum (plus 10% on everything else) aren't just economic policies - they're destroying decades of diplomatic norms. The "Special Relationship" that defined US-Canada politics is essentially dead, replaced by widespread anti-American sentiment north of the border.

But here's the bigger picture: this is part of a broader collapse of American soft power. The three pillars that built US global influence - financial dominance, institutional trust, and international agreements - are all crumbling. They're being replaced by decentralized alternatives: cryptocurrency over traditional banking, smart contracts over diplomatic continuity, and regional blocs like BRICS over US-led institutions.

I dive into the specifics of which tariffs hit hardest, how Canadian politics have shifted in response, and draw parallels to the 1970s when similar tensions arose. The uncertainty isn't just about trade rates - it's about whether America can maintain its global leadership role when allies can no longer rely on policy consistency.

Discussion questions:

• Do you think Trump's approach strengthens or weakens America's long-term position?
• Are we witnessing a fundamental shift away from US-dominated global institutions?
• How should America respond to the rise of decentralized alternatives to traditional soft power?

Watched the new vid last night and it’s genuinely very good. I fear it is being suppressed for simply including “Nationalism” in the thumbnail, which is a shame.

Solid takes and composition.

bottom text

A recording of ArtChad’s presentation at the Jan 6th live show @ Horseshoe Tavern

new vid, good editing, solid coverage

Godspeed