Sunday, March 1, 2026

"I Will Not See The White City Fall:" Billionaire's Obsession with 'The Lord of the Rings' and the Cultural Laundering of White Supremacy through Tolkien's Trilogy

 




INTRODUCTION

                The subfield of Sociology that enquires about the development and establishment of knowledge, keenly referred to as “The Sociology of Knowledge” identifies four areas of knowledge production: Experiences, Interactions/Observations, Institutions, and The Media. In the area of the media, entertainment is often lost to the other media mechanisms of news and advertisements, veiling its influence and overall soft power. Collectively, we do not value the knowledge that we derive from entertainment and other forms of pop culture. This not only obfuscates its impact and importance on the development of our own general knowledge; but maintains a sense of frivolity behind it; relegating it to a hobby, interest or preference. There is purpose in this persuasion. Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (1984) understood that an individual’s taste in a wide variety of cultural behaviors and objects can reflect status (class, culture, etc.) and that through taste, status can be achieved and manipulated. Interestingly however, the reason for that taste is rarely interrogated beyond a simple, and undisclosed affinity. Yet, because pop culture is soft power, the reasons people enjoy things, and how they interpret the media they consume, speaks volumes about their general social perspective. This is especially salient when considering that the wealthy elite also consume media, use it as a method of acquiring knowledge and a determinant of “taste” (In the strictly Bourdieuian sense 😉). This brief paper will consider the rise of the conservative obsession with “Nerd Culture” and its direct correlation with media illiteracy- identifying the power of the “taste” of status; even when it is misinterpreted. Then, using Lord of the Rings as an example, this paper will show how white supremacist ideology is filtered through popular culture, making their fascistic beliefs and behaviors look more reasonable.      

            Basic Sociological Terms

            Before we can engage with this paper’s overall thesis, there are a few sociological terms that will be an important note to this analysis. By defining them upfront they can serve as a glossary of sorts.

Culture: the language, norms, values, rituals, ideas and physical objects that make up a society’s way of life that is passed down from one generation to another by formal or informal forms of education

Subculture This is a microcosm of society in which members of sub-cultural groups have their own language, rituals, values, norms and sanctions.  Individual sub-cultures can be created through demographics (age, race, gender, class, sexuality disability) interests, (Fan subcultures/ Enthusiasts) or geography (nationality). Even though subcultures have their own rules, they are still operating within and are superseded by the dominant cultural authority.

            A derivative of this is Counterculture This is a specific type of subculture that is characterized by the subculture whose values challenge the dominant cultural norms. There are benign and malignant countercultures.

Benign countercultures: are the types of subcultures whose values norms and ideals challenge the dominant cultural narrative (Think Buddhists in a Christian society or Vegans in a majority meat easting nation.)

 Malignant countercultures: Not only have different values than the dominant culture but seek to change the dominant cultural practices to reflect those beliefs (Any kind of Revolutionary movement or an attempt to over throw a government) But it should be expressed that when we think about Malignant countercultures we need to be Culturally relative and understand that the reformation/reconstruction of a dominant culture is not necessarily a bad thing.

High Culture These are the pieces of Art music, literature, theater, which derives its cultural value from being a representation of a high social class; or these are the various pieces of culture that the current elite uses to express their status.

Popular Culture These are the pieces of art music literature theater, film, and technology that have cultural relevance and importance today having mass appeal to the broadest group possible (sometimes referred to as “low” culture).

            Derivative of this is Nerd Culture which is classified out of the social pariah stereotype of “Nerd” to be “of an intellectual yet socially inept person with a high degree of interest in technical topics and/or fantastic genres of popular culture. Originally socially secluded and highly self-referential.” (Herbers 2020:1). Nerd Culture came about due to the synergizing of various genres of popular culture (Sci-fi, Fantasy, Superheroes and Comic Books) with the advancement and perceived progress of digital technology and computer science. Originally used as a pejorative, “Nerd Culture” has become mainstream due to Institutional and power dynamic shifts within subcultures; thereby reshaping the dominant culture to include these aspects.

Reference Group these are the individuals that we collectively use to measure our own behavior. These individuals can be living or dead, people that you know or not, those who are celebrities or personal, real, historical or fictitious. Your Reference group will change as your biography changes, as you enter new social statues and participate in new social roles. Your reference group will be different based upon various social, historical, and cultural factors as well as demographics. Having a Reference Group usually leads to the elevation of those in said group to a morally superior status. Emulating such individuals may cause a transference of those feelings of superiority

 

In Groups and Out Groups simply these are groups that a person has loyalty to (In groups) and a group that one does not have loyalty to (Out groups). The best example of this Fan rivalries (whether that be in sports, popular culture, or consumerism).

 


HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            To begin to deconstruct the billionaire conservative obsession with “Nerd Culture” and specifically The Lord of the Rings, there needs to be an accounting of the direct correlation between the development of digital technology, the reevaluation of geek/nerd status and a reshaping of masculinity. Where these three things intersect becomes a vector for the rise of Nerd culture.

            The Dawn of the Nerds

            Prior to the turn of the 21st century, the cultural capital of an interest in comic books, film, computers and video games was low. Regardless of its social status, the appeal of these hobbies/interests have always been popular, but not always openly. Those of a certain age will remember the shame of going into a comic book shop (hiding purchases in a shop supplied black plastic bag usually reserved for pornography) or the social ostracization once you let slip you enjoyed playing Dungeons and Dragons. These aspects of culture did not have high value in the late 20th century that could be invested or traded upon. There were those of us that leaned into these products and behaviors as a way to find “our people” and build social networks and communities around such shared interests. While others suppressed or hid their interests to maintain a sense of status, especially among children.

            While the geek/nerd culture has always existed; it did not gain social, economic and cultural value until the birth and integration of the internet. The advancement of technology into the computer and digital space increased the overall social and cultural capital of the so-called geek and nerd. A minor point of clarification: nerds and geeks are similar, but different. Even if the terms are often used interchangeably[2]. According to Smith (2025) adjectives that describe a Nerd are “academically gifted, tech-savvy, and often deeply immersed in science.” Whereas a Geek is understood to be “passionate fans who immerse themselves in Marvel characters, pop culture moments, and vibrant fandom communities.” Thus, a Geek is a Comic Con connoisseur cosplayers and collectors, and Nerds are the game developers, engineers and techies. While the range is wide and the characteristics between them are intersectional, it is the difference of tech and its implementation, that becomes a historical fulcrum for the rise of the culture at large. This becomes foundational to the understanding of why so many finance bros and Silicon Valley douche-bags are terrible a textual analysis to the point of media illiteracy.

            The implementation of the internet and the networking of computers saw a rise in the cultural capital of those interested in tech. During the dot.com bubble of the late 1990’s, Internet start-up companies were hiring software developers and coders to build their companies from the ground up. We saw fledgling companies being run by the pejorative “Nerd” having record number evaluations on the public stock market. Because technology was advancing so quickly, anyone who had knowledge about how these systems worked was highly valued. These engineers traded on their cultural capital (Knowledge and experience) from which they gleaned (sometimes) obscene amounts of economic and social clout (Bourdieu 1984). Even when the dot/.com bubble burst, those that emerged from it became the leaders of the new era of business.

            Business is fueled by tech. Therefore, the interests of those who specialized in tech were given more clout and importance. They became the decision makers, and so, their pop culture of choice gained prominence.   As I explain in a previous essay (2025) Elon Musk and Peter Theil became established at this time as a part of “The PayPal Mafia.”  This group of “tech bros” (recently given the nickname “broligarchs”) became cultural “taste” makers. Like Lucas, Spielberg, and now Peter Jackson, who became the studio that they were originally fighting against in the 1970’s and 80’s. These self-described Nerds and Geeks that grew up with their films as a part of their childhood became adults and used that pop culture as not only a personal reference, but as cultural and social lens by which to view the world.  Their ascension into wealth and status was accompanied by the elevation of nerd culture into the mainstream creating the immense monopolization of the monoculture.

 


            Sigma Incels: the Gollum of Masculinity  

                 The arrival of nerd/geek culture on the shores of mainstream recognition carried with it a few parasitic symbiotes that resulted in a transformation of toxic masculinity into a variant that was amenable to the nerd culture that was simmering beneath the surface. Still misogynistic, as its “traditional” (alpha) counterparts, containing a unbridled seething rage towards women but now with a sense of egocentric entitlement, and intellectual superiority.

As I explain in a previous essay (2018)

“Incel”s (short for involuntary celibate) are a relatively new form of misogyny. They are a subsect of “beta” male sexism that is adopted by men who do not fit the masculine beauty or body standards. Their ideology sees women’s bodies as a products that they pay for with dinners, vacations, clothing etc. So, from this perspective, if these men provide material goods for women, then they should have access to their bodies.  They believe that if they are nice to women and are “supreme gentlemen”, then they have claim to women. Often “Incel” men frequent predominantly online spaces like 4chan and reddit from which this isolated subculture has developed this new warped sense of toxic masculinity that is both fragile (able to be deconstructed with the slightest slip up) and preyed upon  by our veracious capitalism.[5] The result of which is a group of emboldened misogynists who’s lack of “sexual conquest” of women they believe is due to feminism.  In their mind, feminism is a movement that hates men; and that any feminist progress is one that hurts men’s sexual access to women.  Thus, when their masculinity is shattered by women being able to have free and equal choice, these men have lashed out violently due to the imagined slights by women that they have perceived.

This is a new-ish flavor of sexism; but instead of masculine reference groups holding characters like Ethan Edwards (The Searchers) Rick Blaine (Casablanca) Harry Calahan (Dirty Harry) John Rambo (Rambo: First Blood Part II) or the T-800 Model 101 (The Terminator); they were replaced by the likes of Han Solo (Star Wars). But just as the men “didn’t match the ‘blueprint’ and match the toughness and independence acted by Wayne, Bogart, or Eastwood” (Connell 2005:70). They also fall short of being Ford’s suave, swaggering sultry anti-hero.

The masculine reference group composition changed again in the 2010’s to include a more “sigma coded” Masculinity; as I explain in my previous essay (2025):

“Sigma” coded masculinity arose first from a 2010 blog post by Science fiction writer, Jon Beale, who, in addition to espousing a myriad of racist and sexist beliefs, expressed his frustration with the generalization of the “alpha and beta” structure and what he considered “the losers” underneath them ( Just to go down the list: deltas gammas, lambdas and omegas). Thus, he coined the term “Sigma male” which is collectively understood as the introverted “lone wolves” and outsiders that seemed to be on par with Alpha males, but maybe didn’t express their level of bravado while remaining intelligent and stoic.  One characteristic of this “Sigma” type of man that is often glossed over is their expressions of neurodivergence. Many of the character names that are often proselytized as “Sigma males” are John Wick, Walter White, Tommy Shelby, Jason Bourne and Tony Stark. Those unconventional Heroes/anti-heroes, that do not exhibit hyper masculine qualities, are brilliant but are able to become singularly focused, mission driven, obsessive, have skilled pattern recognition, able to be a social chameleon but unable to read social cues all the time. Thereby incorporating qualities of neurodivergence on the autism spectrum into this questionable masculinity quagmire.

Not only did neurodivergence become a sexist masculine superpower through these characters, but it also reinforced and focused a sense of misogynistic aggrieved entitlement into the fan subculture. These boys and men that were once bullied, ostracized and victimized a generation prior, now use their newfound popularity to be the gatekeepers of their particular fan fiefdom. Alienating women and people of color from these spaces while still consuming content that reinforces racial stereotypes and the sexual objectification of women; either as passive rewards, or as a sexualized skin suit for masculine violence (Valez 2025).

The proto example of a “sigma coded” masculinity, Neo, from The Matrix, also was the inspirational source for the misogynistic “red pill” movement. Among incels, this is used to describe the moment when men realize that equality and feminism is suppressive and that all institutions are against them stripping them of their identity and their power (Bates 2021). Consumers of this anti-woke vitamin regimen are vast. The movement links together fandoms, and various other spaces claimed by men.   These are the insufferable “um, actually” guys, the eclectic internet trolls, gamers, film “bros”, macho musicians, that collectively make up “the manosphere” (Bates 2021).

 This misogynistic “manosphere” conglomeration across fandoms is often achieved under the guise of accuracy to the “sacred text” and the importance of maintaining the purity of the pop culture that they revere. Aside from the obviously white supremacist coded biological determinism those ideas conjure; this purity, gatekeeping, and hatred is formed out of a misinterpretation of the media they consume; used as a mechanism to fuel their own intersectionally unequal ideologies and validate their vitriol; rather than be an accurate representation of the media content or the intent of the creators. The “Red Pill” movement was created from a film series made by two trans women. People complaining about “Woke Star Trek” miss that it was created with the intention of inclusivity. However, when these misinterpretations are backed by elites that use their wealth and status to gain attention, it can have a deeper impact.

 


SOCIAL ANALYSIS     

As Nerd culture rose in popularity with the elevation of its scions into positions of power, it became a prism by which those geeks and nerds interpret the world. This is the crux of the phrase ‘pop culture is soft power.’ The idea that the popular media we consume shapes our decision making and understanding of our reality. The unfortunate assumption inherent in that phrase is that the interpretation is valid. Yet pop culture is still soft power, even when you misinterpret it. Especially if you are in a wealthy and/or status position where your decisions impact many people. How someone understands the media that they consume, and how they situate the lessons they’ve tacitly learned into an identity, frames their worldview, and therefore how they see and treat other people. Thus, when “manosphere” incel men begin to exercise their power; the fallout of their media illiteracy is something all must reckon with.

A Brief ‘The Lord of the Rings’ Aside

The Lord of the Rings is a high fantasy series of novels written by English Author J R.R. Tolkein. Set in the fictional world of Middle-Earth, it tells the story about the downfall of The Dark Lord Sauron through the destruction of his power source “The One Ring” by an unlikely coalition of different races of people: specifically, Hobbits, Elves, Dwarfs, Men, Wizards and the occasional giant eagle. The books that make up The Lord of the Rings compendium are: The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King. This was a continuation of a children’s Novel, The Hobbit, which he wrote years earlier. Tolkien’s work in this fantasy world was so vast that it required a book of myths and legends called The Silmarillion to accompany it. The overall themes of the books include religion, environmentalism, and the addiction to and corruption of power. A lot of material Tolken pulled from the horrors he experienced during World War I. In the years since, there have been a lot of other debated themes that accuse the text of being racist, specifically Eugenicist, too focused on western power and morality, and the demonizing of the non-western ‘other’. While other interpretations praise the books for its anti-racism and proto feminism.

There are parallels between pop culture consumption and legal theory. It’s all in how the content is interpreted. Much like legal scholarship, those that consume pop culture see an importance in understanding the author’s original intent (originalism), or they believe that, once published, the piece of media takes on a life of its own; able to mean something different to those who consume the media in their particular time and place (Textualism). Most content that is consumed today rarely considers the author’s original intent. A textual analysis allows for a greater amount of diversity of interpretation and makes it easier to apply stories to the current historical and social context, regardless of when they were published. It unfortunately also opens the door wide to misinterpretations that are dangerous and harmful. While it is important to understand that an author is not responsible for what other people understand in their text and what they do with the information they glean; there is a level of accountability that needs to be leveled at them to minimize the spread of problematic interpretations. Thus, the original intent needs to be understood as a mechanism of control against misinterpretation. Unfortunately, this can also result in gatekeeping. Regarding Lord of the Rings, the difference and the impact of interpretation can be seen with the famed film adaptation by Peter Jackson

Peter Jackson’s adaptation of The Lord of the Rings is culturally beloved. The three film series (each based on a single book) filmed in New Zealand from October 1999 to December 2000 after decades of other directors and production companies failed to bring it to screen. Released one film a year from Dec 2001 to Dec 2003 the series took pop culture and even awards ceremonies by storm. The final film Return of the King garnering a “clean sweep” of the 12 nominations at the 76th Annual Academy Awards.

Releasing just months after 9/11 and the fear, hopelessness, and terror it brought many Americans and the world, the film provided both a level of escapism and became the embodiment for the world’s desire for good to triumph over evil. While we’ve learned that actual peace requires more diplomacy and tact than simply chucking a gold ring into some lava; there was a succinctness that boosted morale, as if life worked that way. So, people flocked to consume this content because its ending and success was a foregone conclusion; a desired respite from an uncertain reality we were living through. Now, nearly 25 years from its original release, people are still consuming and making their own content around the films. To the point that in internet searches, the films are list earlier than the source material and brought Tolkien into a new century of pop culture

Because these films were adaptations of Tolkien’s work, they tended to emphasis and downplay particular themes: Power, corruption as addiction, and environmentalism stayed, while Jackson seemed to tone down religious (particularly Christian) elements. It is much easier to frame the films through an anti-racist; pro feminist lends because of the cultural and historical time period they were created.  The ideologies of anti-racism and feminism were far more accepted in the early 2000s when the films were released. Thus, there is a blur in the cultural zeitgeist of what comes from the books and what comes from Jackson’s adaptation. Today, since more people have a passing familiarity with the films and the production behind it, than they do the books, the adaptation becomes more of a touchtone than the books in the public’s consciousness. Unfortunately, this creates a counterculture of those who are “smug book readers” that believe they know Tolkien’s intent and therefore have a sense of superiority. That criticism becomes louder and harder to ignore the more it comes from individuals with wealth, status and power.




The Billionaire Obsession with Nerd Culture

As indicated above, the intersection between Nerd Culture, Business, and technology can be exemplified by the wealthy “broligarchs.” Specifically, the likes of Elon Musk, Peter Theil and JD Vance. These men and the other people hanging on in their orbit, consume and express a deep affinity for nerd culture beyond just using pop culture as an extemporaneous example to get their point across.  These men often use “geek speak” including the language of Tolkien as representation of their In Group status with one another. This is done for solidarity and as an exclusionary subcultural shorthand. Yet, for many of them, they seem far more interested in aesthetics rather than the context of Tolkien’s work. They would host Tolkien themed parties that they would use to expand social networks using The Lord of the Rings in the vetting process. With many of them actively naming and styling a number of their companies from various aspects of Tolkien’s Universe.

·         Palantir- By far the most famous of the ‘Rings’ inspired broligarch tech companies. The name “Palantir” is a reference to the all-seeing stones of Sauron the Dark Lord. One of which corrupted the Saruman the White. Created by Peter Theil and apt to its namesake, the company’s focus is on data harvesting and surveillance. With its contracts, it allows governments, militaries and corporations to combine and analyze data from multiple sources using AI software. It has been tied to Israel’s genocide in Gaza as well as DHS, ICE, and CBP agencies domestically

·         Anduril- A military intelligence defense company created by Palmer Luckey in 2017 that takes its name from Aragorn’s sword, known as “The Flame of the West.” The company is at the forefront of AI Powered innovations in warfare including drones and other autonomous weapons systems. By some accounts this has transformed the Military Industrial Complex to bring LLM’s and other Generative AI into the Defense Industry. Currently, is creating a virtual wall along the US-Mexico border its towers reminiscent of the Eye of Sauron.         

·         Erebor- Palmer Luckey’s Digital Crypto Bank is named after one of the wealthy subterranean dwarven kingdoms in Middle-Earth. It has been described as “virtual currency…that are part of the United States innovation economy, in particular technology companies focused on virtual currencies, artificial intelligence, defense, and manufacturing, as well as payment service providers, investment funds and trading firms (including registered investment advisers, broker dealers, proprietary trading firms, and futures commission merchants).” The bank only serves select individuals in the high to ultra-high net worth category. Basically, it is a tax shelter for the uber wealthy. A mechanism by which to funnel all their profits and other ill-gotten gains through.

·         Mithril Capital is an investment firm that had ties to DOGE efforts to gut federal spending that took its name from Tolkien’s fictional metal in the series.

·          Durin Mining Technologies- This company builds and automates drill rigs for  mineral discovery taken from the name of a Lord in one of the Dwarven Kingdoms of Middle-Earth.     

It should be no surprise that all these companies are invested in each other; all linked back to Peter Theil.

As one can infer from this list, the use of Tolkien iconography in this way seems to insinuate either a disconnect with Tolkien’s text as it is narratively presented (Palantir) implying a level of media illiteracy, or these names and inspirations are trading on an understanding of the text that, when applied to real life, shows a value system that reinforces aspects of government control, militarism, racism, Western globalization and misogyny. Thus, it is the (mis)reading of Tolkien’s text in this way that veils these ideas as dangerous. Allowing these wealth tech “Broligarchs” to launder their crypto-fascism through the prism of pop culture. Making those ideas both more palatable to a broader audience and provide plausible deniability in the face of conflict, criticism or consequences.   




            A White Supremacist Reading of Tolkien

According to Robert Tally (2024)[3], in the Post- Jackson adaptation landscape The Lord of the Rings wealth elites like Theil, Musk, JD Vance and others, have openly and emphatically used Tolkien not only as semantic inspiration for their companies, and their intended goals, but also as a delivery system for their own ultra conservative worldview. Using the story of Frodo’s Journey to Mount Doom “and back again” to justify and evangelize their white supremacist, racist, anti-immigrant, neo-Nazi Christian Nationalism (Tally 2024).

This Fascistic reading of Tolkien often emphasizes:

·         Tolkien’s original racist description of the Uruk-hai and that their creation (analogous to race mixing) was considered an evil abomination; thereby promoting a Eugenic argument

·         The use of Tolkien’s morality map That emphasizes “The West:” Gondor, Hobbiton as good and “The East:” Mordor as Evil. Even using Tolken’s Legend of Races in the books as a hierarchy.  

·          Perceiving the Races of Middle-Earth as white ethnics unifying to fight the oncoming horde of dark invaders. This could be used as a narrative parallel to unify various factions of White supremacists (KKK, Proud Boys, Conservative tech Bros, Jan 6ers, and Christian Nationalists)   

·         Saruman was sympathetic to the plight of these fantastical immigrants from the south and became corrupted by them. Gandalf, after battle with a dark beast rejects that same power to become “Saruman as he should have been” in Gandalf the White

·         Segregationist (Everyone lives in their own lands) and Anti-Interventionism (not wanting to get involved in a war beyond borders)

·         Gondor constantly referred to as a literal “White City“

This reading of Tolkien is obfuscated and laundered under the guise of “entertainment”. Yet there cannot be a complete dismissal of this interpretation as simply false, no matter how illiterately stupid it seems, due to the wealth and power of those that believe in it. In Interviews, JD Vance, Vice President of the United States, has mentioned that in reading Tolkien and being exposed to Jackson’s adaptations, he came away with an “apocalyptic frame of mind.” In this it seems transparent that what these men are inspired by is the industrial control of those that would be considered antagonists in in Tolkien’s books. Theil and others want to create a new world order much like Sauron. But because their support for Armageddon is couched in the trappings of high fantasy, it becomes a disempowering dog whistle.       

Secondarily, by many accounts these “ New Men of Power” (to borrow a Millsian phrase), and people who share this interpretation, are not only misguided, but they are terrible Nerds and Geeks. They are the ones that engage in online trolling, spamming Tolkien Studies Journals and Conferences to bemoan “woke” casting of adaptations ( Tally 2024).  Not only do they have the insufferable qualities of “try hard” incels. But, their appropriated sigma masculinity is so insecure that they have to constantly seek validation from others even if they have to lie about their prowess to gain/maintain credibility among their fellow men.

While it is easy to write off these individuals as pitifully sad, insecure, arrested developed man-babies; that is a coping mechanism for those of us without the same level of access to power and influence to be able to exist in such an unequal world. However, the infantilizing and emasculating of these men does not make their decisions and control over our institutions any less complete. It just makes living within their tech-bro oligarchy more bearable for the rest of us. Unfortunately, this normalization still benefits them. No matter how many jokes we make at their expense, their wealth, status and control allow for a shaping of the world in their desired image of the pop culture they consume. Therefore, because of the power that they wield, that representation, no matter how inaccurate, threatens to become reality.

As I write this, Warner Bros Discovery shareholders have accepted Paramount’s bid  for a controlling stake in the company with a purchase price of $31 dollars a share (up from a price of $7 before Paramount got into a bidding war with Netflix). This was after Larry Ellison, uber Billionaire and CEO of Oracle stepped in to help his son David (CEO of Paramount and Sky Dance media) with the sale.

According to Lucas Manifreadi at The Wrap:

The combined company would have the Warner Bros. film, television and video game studios, its publishing and licensing divisions, DC Studios and DC Entertainment, HBO/HBO Max and its content libraries, alongside a wide portfolio of domestic and international television networks, including key brands such as Discovery, Animal Planet, Cartoon Network, Adult Swim, Eurosport, TNT, TBS, TLC, Food Network and CNN as well as free-to-air networks in the United Kingdom and Europe and the combined company would have a massive broadcast rights portfolio to key sport leagues and sporting events across the United States and Europe, such as the NFL, UFC, All Elite Wrestling, the NHL, the PGA Tour, the Masters Tournament, NCAA, several UEFA events, the Olympics among others alongside Paramount's film, television and video game studios, linear networks and its content library. The deal would also bring MTV, Nickelodeon, The Movie Channel, VH1 and Comedy Central reunited under common ownership with Warner after more than 40 years, as well as granting the Warner stakes on both The CW and Philo.

     While, as of this writing, the deal has yet to be approved by the FCC. Its regulators will judge if the sale is an anti-trust violation. However, the deal is considered a foregone conclusion given Previous mergers in the past, and the familial closeness between the Ellisons and the Trump Administration. Ostensibly, now with control of two major news organizations and a literal litany of entertainment content consolidated under a neo-fascist corporate control; it is likely that this hyper conservative ideology will continue to be laundered through pop culture to ameliorate their fascistic world view into the public consciousness.   

   



CONCLUSION

The laundering of white supremacist ideologies through fantasy reinforces the importance of seeing popular culture as soft power. With the continued monopolization of content through corporate mergers, the fascistic interpretation of Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings seems to be the death knell of diversely creative art. Under these conditions, we should expect the abuse of nostalgia and the use of familiar lore and our favorite stories to justify violence and human rights abuses. Thus, there needs to be push back and a continued vigorous critique of these interpretations less we lose the spark of human creativity and succumb to an apocalyptic future we have only experienced in stories.

 

REFERENCES

Bates, Laura 2021. Men who Hate Women: From Incels to Pickup Artists: The Truth about Extreme Misogyny and How it Affects Us All Naperville: Sourcebooks  

Bourdieu, Pierre 1984.  Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste  Cambridge: Harvard University Press   

Brutlag, Brian 2018 “Mandy Review” In The Sociologist’s Dojo Retrieved on 2/20/26 Retrieved at https://thesociologistsdojo.blogspot.com/2018/10/mandy-review.html

____________ 2025 “The Curious Case of Tony Stark and Elon Musk: 'Sigma Male' Masculinity and the Myth of the Benevolent Billionaire” In The Sociologist’s Dojo Retrieved on 2/27/26 Retrieved at https://thesociologistsdojo.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-curious-case-of-tony-stark-and-elon.html

Connell, R.W. 2005. Masculinities Berkeley: University of California Press

  Herbers, Martin Rolf. 2020 "Nerd Culture." In The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications,, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483375519.n459

Smith, Shequeta L. 2025. “Nerd vs. Geek: A Cultural Identity Crisis in the Age of Tech & Fandom.” In Medium Retrieved on 2/20/26 Retrieved at https://medium.com/@agentshero/nerd-vs-geek-a-cultural-identity-crisis-in-the-age-of-tech-fandom-397a93f6dc2a

Tally, Robert T 2024. “Tolkien’s Deplorable Cultus Right-Wing Hobbit Enthusiasts and the Urgency of Marxist Criticism in Fantasy.” In Spectre  retrieved on 3/1/2026 Retrieved at https://spectrejournal.com/tolkiens-deplorable-cultus/

Valez, Aida 2025. “Toxic Fandoms: Why Women Feel Threatened in Nerd Culture” In Emerging Writers Retrieved on 2/27/26 Retrieved at https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1178&context=emergingwriters


Sunday, February 8, 2026

'Rise of the Machines': The Creative Emptiness of AI use in Film and Beyond

 




INTRODUCTION

            We are currently living through a synergistic cultural moment of the rapid birth, maturity and dominance of algorithmic software, touted as “artificial intelligence”. Many of its uses can be subjectively perceived as more benevolent than others. The use in the Healthcare industry in screening for earlier cancer detection seems more universally embraced; while its use in screening job applicants less so due to the reinforcement of racist and misogynistic stereotypes (Noble 2018, Bates 2025).  In film, and the process of filmmaking, there is this same dichotomy of acceptable and unacceptable uses throughout every stage of the filmmaking process (pre-production, production, and post). Yet unsurprisingly, that embrace or rejection has been typically divided across social class status, and whether someone has the ability to hold and exercise power.[1] The higher the status, which correlates to an increased likelihood that an individual has the ability to hold and exercise power in some form or another (aided by their other intersecting privileges of whiteness or maleness) tends to embrace the algorithm as a tool to increase profit, productivity and (perceived) convenience, and reducing cost. While those that reject it and see potential calamity in its use are those without either status, wealth or power. In the filmmaking industry, this divide is typically oversimplified between the financiers (studio heads, producers, other corporate executives) and the creatives (filmmakers: actors, directors, production designers, cinematographers, key grips, boom operators etc.). While there is some validity to this clean bifurcation, the reality is a bit more muddled. This paper will briefly go over the history of using technology in films, and the cultural shifts that happened because of them. Then, contemplate the many social ills that lead to AI’s generation and others with it at the epicenter.

 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            Filmmaking is an artform made possible through technology. This can be said of every artistic expression regardless of time-period, and like those other art forms, film builds around it a culture and a lucrative identity steeped in the norms and rituals of the time. As these technologies change, often falsely framed as strictly an improvement, the culture reforms around it. Every era of film saw this transition. Silent film finally spoke with “The talkies”, black and white screens became Technicolor*, and filmstock transformed into digital.

 These are periods of transition that brought with it monumental change. Subjectively, each of these periods in film history were met with scoff, skepticism, and outright disdain; some founded and others not. Granted, things always got lost in the interim. Several silent movie actors found that they could not easily make the transition into spoken film. When film started presenting in color- Cinematographers and Costume designers lost the ability to light and use darkness. Digital films lose texture and a sense of verisimilitude to the image because it is shot and presented at a higher frame rate than our eyes take in and our brain can process information. Whether you mark these losses as trivial, a travesty or triumph of technology, there are those skills and people that will always be left behind when technology leaps forward. The difference with algorithms, and using AI software for a creative outlet, is there is a relinquishing of agency and autonomy in its use.

Like any of the other gorge leaping feats of technological advancement, AI has been embraced and reviled. Currently, algorithmic software is being used in all part of the film production process. In pre-production, many types of software are now being used in brainstorming script ideas, make box office predictions, story boarding, location scouting and 3-D modeling. In production: algorithmic software is used in art departments and production design. Shots are being built by computer models with only text-based prompts. In post-production, the use of algorithmic software in visual effects reduces both labor costs and time. These are already being used in films with bigger budgets; and regardless of the (justifiably understandable) vitriol films receive who use “AI” (in this way), it does not stop it forward momentum from implementation to integration. But before we can look at the social ramifications of this, we need to understand the Sociological context.   

Some Relevant Sociological Basics:

Sociologically, the social relationship/dependence on a particular piece of technology can be measured through the understanding of cultural lag and cultural diffusion. Cultural lag is the difference in time between when a piece of technology is invented and when it is integrated into social norms and the social order (Jary and Jary 1991). Basically, technology is always created before the behaviors and cultural rituals that allow it to become a necessity for daily living.

 Every piece of technology goes through a cultural lag process. It is that which determines its broader use. Sometimes that use becomes something way beyond its original scope, such as the internet. This is because due to our (US) lopsided value system (motivated by profit driven capitalism) much of our technology is developed for governmental and military application first, and then redesigned for civilian use after for the purposes of profit. Thus, the cultural lag is motivated by profit; private companies determining how they can get civilians to consume their (usually, at the time, unnecessary) gadget by convincing/conditioning them through marketing that their contraption will make consumers’ lives convenient. With that, the piece of technology becomes more ubiquitous, through the process of cultural diffusion.

    Cultural Diffusion is the spread of cultural traits or social practices from one society or group to another. Globalization and particularly imperialism often causes the spread of these cultural traits. For over a century the Unites States’ main export was our culture through the creation of the globalized marketplace. In the case of technology, the more available that technology is the more likely people are going to use it. Additionally, if you make that piece of tech necessary by changing the way necessary social behaviors are performed (applying for a job, acquiring necessary government documentation etc.); you have both a fundamental consumer base and a captive audience.

This diffusion and integration are still capitalist forward with the understanding of consumer engineering and planned obsolescence which perpetuates the cycle of cultural lag and diffusion. By making products with a designed shelf life and then constructing a barrier to object repair through the legalese of “proprietary technology”, allows Corporations that control this technology to update, change and (inevitably) make worse the technology and service you are using while discontinuing the diffused product in favor of the new one. So, we engineer consumers into a product’s planned obsolescence- effectively dragging people across the cultural threshold of new technology; and making a profit while doing it. 

Those that have the money, ability and cultural context to shift with the cycle of lag and diffusion have an easier time existing in this social order. Those with money can purchase the knowledge or hire someone to keep up with the cycle as it happens. Younger generations who are digital natives to the newer forms of technology than the older generation’s digital immigrants will have an easier time integrating and adapting; and those who understand the cycle’s context shift are more likely to have an easier transition. The rest, however, may be dragged kicking and screaming[2] over that cultural threshold.   

     


      The Arbitrary beginning (of the End): George Lucas, Peter Jackson and Dominance of CGI

 

As stated earlier, the filmmaking artform is made possible only through the advent of both photography and the development of “moving pictures”. The ability to record movement through the capturing of consecutive still frames that, when played back at a particular speed (24 frames per second) gives the illusion of movement. Since there has been a variety of advance technologies that have fundamentally reshaped how the filmmaking process works, especially in the US, it is relatively arbitrary where a researcher stakes their claim as to what is the source of our current predicament with algorithmic “AI”. This paper could have easily gone back to the invention of the camera and moved forward; but in the interest of time, and the author’s own specialty and interest; This paper is arbitrarily starting with two directors, George Lucas and Peter Jackson and their impact on the subgroup of visual effects within the filmmaking industry.

There is a lot that could be (and has been) said/written about George Lucas: unjustifiably deified “God” of a Sci-fi Universe, Independent filmmaking renegade turned vapid power-hungry megalomaniacal CEO in his older age. And an innovator of visual and special effects. Focusing on the latter, being a youthful cinephilic brigand, George Lucas created companies that specialized in parts of the filmmaking process with which he wanted to experiment. By controlling his own companies there was less resistance to his ideas, thereby less rejection, and no one to tell him “No.” (This became a problem later in his career). In the 1970’s Lucas either singularly founded or Co-founded several companies specializing in one or more aspects of the filmmaking process.

The companies (and it’s scions) that George Lucas founded which served as a precursor to the current algorithmic apocalypse in filmmaking are Lucasfilm, and its subsidiaries: Industrial Light and Magic (ILM) and Skywalker Sound. Through these companies, Lucas could experiment and push the boundaries of the filmmaking process; transforming the theatrical experience and how films are made.[3]



 These revolutionary leaps in visual effects through the decades began to consistently rely on computers as tools to create the feast of visual feats on film. Lucas leaned into computers being able to tell a better visual story than was done traditionally through models, miniatures, and animatronics (a bread-and-butter staple of Lucas based effects work of the late 70’s early 80’s). ILM was one of the first companies to create a completely computer generated sequence, a completely computer generated character, morphing, digital composition, computer generated 3-D effects, computer generated composite of human skin, realistic computer generated dinosaurs, first fully computer-generated character in a live-action film using motion-capture, and founded what would become the Mo-cap system. ILM was one of the founders of CGI visual effects. Since its inception, almost every film with remotely any visual effects have been touched by ILM. For decades, this company has monopolistically forged the track of visual effects right into our current cultural moment with the use of AI. In 2025, Rob Bredow unveiled Star Wars test footage using a text-to-video model to generate fictional creatures. This was ILM's first implementation of generative artificial intelligence. This is not to say that George Lucas and his corporate progeny are singularly at fault for the development of AI in filmmaking, but they did forge a path allowing us to reach the precipice of creative and moral bankruptcy of AI use in the Industry.

On the heels of Lucas, Peter Jackson was another principled indie horror director that became the head of his own studio, and a significant data point in the genealogy of AI use in film. Jackson’s historical significance to this development is Weta Digital, a company he co-founded to create the visual effects on his feature Heavenly Creatures in 1994; and would later gain recognition in the late 90’s early 2000’s for the company’s work on Jackson’s adaptation of The Lord of the Rings(LOTHR). It was through the production process that the Weta team developed the software to create a computer-generated background actor. This allowed the battle sequences to achieve an epic scale. In addition to human extras in suits, makeup and prosthetics, there were additional “background extras” that were painted in in post. Digital people moving as determined by a programmable algorithmic sequence. The existence of which would grow in contention for the next 25 years.

 After LOTR, Jackson guided Weta to continue to push the boundaries of creative algorithmic software. When the Imperial War Museum approached him to create a tribute to WWI veterans by using hours of archived footage from the time, Jackson, through Weta, slowed down the film, colorized it, and reconstructed audio from the archive approximating what these soldiers might have sounded like. The documentary They Will Never Grow Old was met with high praise, which encouraged Jackson to go further. In his latest Documentary about The Beatles, Jackson apocryphally “brings the band back together” (read as from the dead) for a new song: “Now and Then”. This was achieved by Algorithmic software.  The AI scoured through demo tapes of John Lennon to extract his vocals and place them with the rest of the Beatles who recorded the song back in the 90’s for their Anthology album. This calls into question the value of entertainers, legacy, agency and autonomy. An argument that came to a head in 2023.       

 


The 2023 WGA and SAG-AFRA Strike  

     In 2023, after the Writer’s Guild of America (WGA) went on strike, contract negotiations also deteriorated between The Screen Actors Guild (SGA) and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP). Among the contested points of negotiation was “digital likeness” rights and the use of AI in film. Writers and Actors in solidarity clashed with Studio heads. Disney CEO Bob Igar called the demands “ non-realistic, disruptive and dangerous.”. This is after Disney allegedly scanned background actors in their show WandaVision so that they could be used again without having to rehire the actors. Much of this was done with the air of expectation with little communication between production and the actors. Additionally, many of the actors not only did not give consent to this process, but they were never told how or if this digital avatar would ever be used on screen. If it's used, they might never know. No matter what happens with it, they’d never see any payment for it.

During the nearly 4-month strike from July to November 2023, the division and rhetoric used got ugly. One unnamed executive was alleged to have revealed the studio’s tactic: to draw out the strike long enough until writers and actors start losing their homes to force more favorable negotiating positions. The struggle became real for many writers and actors, as many who were not award winning or “on the A list” struggled to pay rent. Yet, through a commitment to solidarity, the Writers and Actors, with support from the Directors and Producers Guild and many high-profile politicians, transformed the industry in regard to the use of Generative AI.

The deal that was ratified by the union in November 2023 includes the following AI provisions:

·         Consent must be given for any digital replication or alteration of performers. Consent must be clear and conspicuous and may be obtained through an endorsement or statement in the performer’s employment contract that is separately signed or initialed by the performer or in separate writing that is signed by the performer.

·         48 hrs. notice before being scanned

·         A separate written agreement in all contracts regarding digital likeness creation and use

·         The process of scanning is to be considered work, and they need to be compensated

·         Must include a reasonably specific description of how the digital likeness will be used  

·         Consent is obtained per job. If the likeness is used in another project a separate consent must be given. 

This was a landmark negotiation that closes a gap in Copyright Law that did not protect actor’s face or voice. Thus, in 2024, using the 2023 strike as a foundation, voice actors struck against the videogame industry for some of the same provisions.  Yet, even with these provisions to make the integration of AI more equitable, it does not thwart the use of AI in filmmaking and the dangers it poses.

 

SOCIAL ANALYSIS

            The sad irony of the continued expansion of AI is that through its learning process, and the more it is fed already published content, the software becomes a cultural and social mirror that can be held up to society. According to Bates (2025) AI lifts the veil on institutional inequality of every variety as these Language Learning Models (LLM) are not deliberately trained with a racist/sexist/ableist/classists agenda. Instead, the sexism, racism and anti-humanism displayed by AI algorithmic software content exposes the deeply inequitable discrimination the permeates every aspect of American culture and every institutional mechanism it uses.  




            It’s Capitalism’s Fault

            When looking at the continued encroachment of AI into creative spaces of film and popular culture, there needs to be an acknowledgement of the driving force of its generation: Capitalism. Granted, this is an easy thing to blame, due to capitalism’s basic function of dehumanization and alienation of those that are trapped within it. Which is everyone. Marx (1992) calls this commodification: the ability for anything in society, including humans, to be bought, sold, traded or exchanged. Weber (2019) identified how maintenance of routines results in complacency to the exploitation that people experience allowing capitalism to continue unfettered. While conditioning individuals to be a better fit for this exploitative bureaucratic capitalist system.

            A culturally learned behavior that contributes to capitalism’s continuation and generational reproduction is the belief that advancing technology leads to progress. Since the birth of the digital age, we have had this belief that technology makes our lives “better”. This techno futurism has been in cultural lock step with capitalism. Advances in technology are advanced by the profit motive, but often, it is not for the betterment of people more than it is the deepening of pockets. Thus, the intimacy of technology and capitalism may make our lives more convenient (once we are integrated), but it also ushers us into a new age of digital feudalism (Arditi 2023).

            According to Arditi (2023):

            The term digital feudalism connects to the moment of primitive accumulation as feudalism transitioned to capitalism. Just how peasants were kicked off the land to go to work in new positions [in the factories] without a social safety net today workers lose their jobs and go to work as gig workers (4)

 Digital feudalism thrives on debt, precarious labor and unending consumption (Arditi 2023). Unending Consumption is the driving force that has motivated the development of AI and algorithmic software. Arditi (2021) pinpoints the rise and dominance of streaming that fundamentally changed how we consume content. The term “streaming” being an apt description because it invokes a flow that is endless.

            In the digital age, capitalism sped up- expanding the means of consumption into the liminal space of the internet-which promptly turned into a giant shopping mall (Agger 2004). But for companies, consumers are the product. Not only do they provide these services that vie for customer attention and their engagement. Now, even consumer information is monetized under the paper-thin guise of free access. The internet and social media provide companies with a marketplace of data on which to harvest. In this space, we are then conditioned to endlessly consume: “…we subscribe to music, video, software, or news services we provide companies with constant and consistent consumption. It is unending because once we subscribe there is no out.” (Arditi 2021:17). This ultimately makes transactions more transient. Therefore, there is an unwillingness to connect, resulting in alienation.

            Desires do not desire satisfaction; desire, desires desire… The ideal consumer (Saarinen and Taylor: 1994)

            Zygmunt Bauman (2007) discusses this transition to transience in his critique of the consumer economy. Stating that nothing is embraced by individuals in a consumer economy for very long.  There is no ultimate desire, no point of full satisfaction. What this means is that individuals in a consumer society are in a state of perpetual un-fulfillment (Bauman 2007).

 This creates consumers who:

  • Are Impatient, impetuous, restive and excitable
  •  Lose interest quickly
  • Their momentary satisfaction does not require learning or skill to obtain (Instant Gratification)
  • The promise and hope of satisfaction precede the need promise to be satisfied
  • Are roped into consuming by the sensations and experiences certain products promise. Which is why product acquisition always seems hollow
  • Believe that having no more desires is equated to having no more prospects in the world

     

Now, with these consumers, this unending consumption is liquified and so are our identities (Arditi 2021, Binkley 2008).

Under traditional consumption practices, there is a fetishizing of commodities as they are used to represent identity (Marx 1992). Much of who we are is determined and represented by the products that we consume. In the era of streaming, Liquid Consumption is defined as the consumption of the 21st century, one of liquid Modernity (the contemporary social and cultural condition of radicalized ambivalence) where a person’s identity is not fixed by an imposed order or shared group affiliation.[4] The practice of this is one of anti-consumerism in the traditional sense, and yet they still consume. As the title of “liquid” implies, we have shifted to consume an increased number of experiences (the intangible) rather than just things (tangible). But this is false. It is more accurate that through streaming, we have “liquified” our culture transforming art, literature, theater, and film into “content.”

The internet has exacerbated this liquification of culture into “content” through the decline of physical media. Endless consumption is easier, and possible, because we no longer need tangible space to store it (Brutlag 2021). This socially conditions the public to seamlessly transition into an unending liquid consumption of content where we experience the content rather than acquire it. Because we often do not see the spatial cost of the content we consume[5]. Digital storage is amorphous. Arbitrary capitalist barriers are in place to allow for socially constructed levels of exclusivity. How much storage you want is determined by how much you are willing to pay. Once you pay, there is no lengthy home renovation needed, you don’t have to purchase bookshelves or tubs for storage; you are just granted access to more. Almost every digital storage service reinforces the same nebulous imagery (e.g. “the cloud”) as if it doesn’t take up any physical space at all. This too is false. The storage of data has tangible consequences in the form of social and environmental impacts.




The Social and Environmental Impact of Data Centers

The term “The Cloud” purposefully evokes ethereal imagery. Designed to conjure a mental picture of a liminal emptiness that is akin to the public perception of cosmic space. However, as cosmic space is not the vacuous hollow many have perceived (consisting most of dark matter and dark energy), “The Cloud” has a tangible representation in the form of data centers.  Data centers are buildings that house the infrastructure needed to run computers, including servers, network equipment and data storage drives. The more reliance we have on digital storage and unending consumption through streaming, the more social and natural resources these centers consume. Which results in outrageously dangerous environmental impacts on land, water use and consumption of electricity.

  According to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, [Data Centers] can range from smaller centers—integrated into larger buildings for internal use by companies—that are on average less than 150 square feet, to hyperscale centers which are operated off-site by large tech companies to facilitate large-scale internet services. On average, hyperscale data centers are 30,000 square feet, although the largest of these data centers can reach sizes of well over one million square feet. As of 2024, more than half of the world’s hyperscale data centers were owned by tech giants Amazon, Microsoft and Google.” (Chen 2025).

There are approx. 4,165 data centers nationwide. These centers end up gluttonously consuming an astronomical amount of resources. Land is used to store their massive servers (often underground) and water is used to continuously cool the servers 24 hours a day, seven days a week.  Large data centers can consume up to 5 million gallons per day, equivalent to the water use of a town populated by 10,000 to 50,000 people. In addition to this, in these areas, wastewater increases, often without significant infrastructure to handle the volume. This leads to spills and leaks that threaten land and ground water of a surrounding area.

 According to Nguyen and Green (2025):[6]

·         Data centers increase local electric utility rates by driving up overall energy demand, which can strain grid capacity and force utilities to invest in costly infrastructure upgrades. These costs are passed on to residents through higher rates

·         A single data center can consume up to 2 megawatt hours of power, equivalent to the power used by 2,000 homes

·         Tax breaks for data centers do not deliver the promised economic benefits, such as high-paying jobs, and they reduce local tax revenues, while shifting financial burdens onto communities and schools

·         Data centers’ massive energy demands are prolonging the operation of fossil fuel plants and undermining state renewable energy goals

·         While advanced cooling methods like liquid immersion and direct-to-chip cooling offer energy efficiency improvements, current technologies force a tradeoff between energy and water efficiency, limiting sustainable solutions.

 

The construction of AI and algorithmic software both makes these problems worse and is the next step in the logistical exploitation of capitalism’s unending consumption.

      A standard Marxian analysis of capitalism is the understanding that as the economic system expands there is a finite number of markets it can reach, which is to say all of them. Once all the markets have been acquired, refined and synthesized for efficiency, the source of exponential profit comes back to labor. Companies can always reduce labor costs to increase profits. One mechanism by which to reduce labor costs is automation. AI and algorithmic software are forms of digital automation. AI and algorithmic software exploit labor in two keyways: job replacement, and product theft. According to MIT, current AI has the capacity to 11.7% of the workforce by the digital automation of customer service, computer coding, data analysis and collection. AI is also changing the way that jobs are traditionally done; skills are lost in favor of algorithmic analysis and diagnostics; and those in the workforce have to prepare for the impending transformation[7]  Secondly, already published material whether that be entertainment products like art, film, music, and other forms of popular culture, or Science based research and analysis, becomes food for the algorithm. AI scours the internet for material to learn and copy from. It is an unwilling digital apprenticeship that results in human creative obsolescence. AI generated pop culture has become so ubiquitous that it is increasingly difficult to spot.  

Additionally, AI has made all the social and environmental impacts of Data centers worse, because they require vastly more resources than data centers were using prior. In 2024,  NPR reported that each ChatGPT search uses ten times more electricity than a Google search. In March 2024, Forbes reported that the water consumption associated with a single conversation with ChatGPT was comparable to that of a standard plastic water bottle. This is due to the training (feeding) of AI, and the required linguistic breakdown and learning that has to happen in order for the algorithm to understand a query.

 As our current administration leans into AI and its use, we are seeing drastic impacts of land and housing. Most data centers operate in rural areas. Therefore, the existence of a data center takes up a lot of space which can affect the availability of housing. Last year, The Trump Administration declared Abaline, TX as the epicenter for AI’s future with a $500 billion infrastructure project to build data centers for future AI products run by Stargate.[8] But as thousands of construction workers descended on the town, rent prices increased the Abilene average rent per month is $2,395, up $1,000 from the year before (2024). Even before the data center, the city faced a housing shortage of about 5,600 units. Now even the Data center employees are living out of their cars, because they had nowhere else to go. The more our unending consumption continues in perpetuity, the more likely many of us won’t have a place to store ourselves regardless of how many terabytes of storage we have access to. 

                


            AI is a Cultural Mirror of Horrors

As mentioned earlier, AI learns through the content it consumes. It acts as a cultural mirror to society’s failings. In the United States, that means that AI has learned to be misogynistic, racist and all around hateful. There are instances of AI predicting and increase in black crime due to learned racist stereotypes. A Microsoft chat bot that learned to be a Nazi from reading twitter. There have even been chat bots that have encouraged suicide; and recently Twitter’s AI bot Grok has allowed users to “undress photos” using AI. This reinforces the way that sexual abusers can use AI to stalk, harass, and violate their targets (Bates 2025).

Outside of a direct personal level of harm, and the use of micro aggressive language used in social media, in a broader context, as these algorithms get ported into various social institutions and put in charge of various organizational tasks and distributions, their learned discrimination will perpetuate the stereotypes they were built on. This could affect marginalized people’s access to healthcare and job opportunities while also having the potential to erase their existence entirely. Laura Bates (2025) points out that because AI algorithms are taught to categorize sex and gender into a binary (and not the properly understood spectrum) this will either cause people who don’t fit into that binary be organized by their sex assignment rather than their preferred gender identity. Thereby misgendering trans folk. While potentially erasing nonbinary people as simply outliers. AI consumption and framing are organized by gender to reinforce the patriarchy. The computer has a voice, and it sounds metaphorically masculine (Faber,2020). Siri, Alexa and other LLM’s are feminized because of the sexist culture of female assistants in business, and the gender socialization that teaches girls to be mediators, placaters and helpers for men.  This trend will continue so long as women remain 22 % of AI data professionals, only 18% of AI users while 45% of AI Ph. D graduates are white and 80% are male (Bates 2025).

            The continuation of this is more than just a “reap-what-you-sow” reflection of the intersectionally vile ableist, heterosexist, wealthy white supremacist capitalist patriarchy (hooks 2000). There is a purpose for its reproduction, and that purpose is profit. Misinformation is profitable, and political and economic institutions have been financially enriched by trafficking in it (Noble 2018). Misinformation has been politically weaponized to be a pathway to power; and currently used to implement authoritarian style policies ( Project 2025, NSPM-7). AI is not just regurgitating conspiracies and falsities; they are also generating them. Recently, scholars discovered that AI would fabricate academic articles by real people. This got so sophisticated that some scholars ended up citing the fake article as evidence.

                 


   

Desensitizing the Masses

            Unfortunately, as much as film and popular culture has been negatively impacted by the creation and implementation of AI into creative fields, it has also assisted in the desensitization of AI’s threat through misdirection. For generations, there have been Sci-fi stories in books, television and film that have depicted the integration of AI into human societies as a catalyst for the apocalypse. At the core of this conflict is usually a small band of human resistance fighting self-aware machines.  We’ve seen versions of this same story for the last 30-40 years. Blade Runner, The Terminator Franchise, and The Matrix all have presented the evolution of AI to be a threat to human existence. A direct militaristic annihilation. While these films as cultural products were talking about other eras and drawing upon history and culture to say something about the human condition (Faber, 2020). It also creates an explicit and hyperbolic threat of AI in the public consciousness. Thus, every time someone discusses their fear of AI, they invoke one of these well-known Sci-fi franchises: “Do you want Skynet? Because this is how you get Skynet.” “This is how Ultron became a problem.” Did you even see The Matrix?!”. The public fears AI only through the lens of “malevolent humanoid machines taking over the world. As a result, we often tend to think of the term AI as futuristic, distant and improbable.” (Bates 2025:230). We use film as a cultural touchtone, a lens by which we can understand the world. Therefore, anything less than “The Rise of the Machines” to overthrow humanity will seem bearable, manageable, and better than the alternative. Which we will always use as a reference to how bad AI could be, regardless of its fiction.    

The hyperbole around the fear of AI also conceals the real labor exploitation at its core. The necessity of AI to have a reserve army of technicians and data workers that collect annotate, curate and verify data sets (Bates 2025:265). Classically, in the Marxian sense, this work is outsourced to call centers in poorer developing countries of color. Unsurprisingly, the work is inconsistent, it has grueling hours (12-20 hr. shifts), low wages, is tightly disciplined, involving gender-based harassment, and psychological trauma. As with the textile sweatshop labor before them, these workers are invisible to the western consumers whose convenience is generated by their unseen labor.




CONCLUSION

            Profit driven capitalism has led us to this space of unending consumption fueled by a techno-futurism that insists that LLM’s and algorithmic software will always be considered progressive. Film and popular culture have been victims, accomplices, and perpetrators in this venture that has led to the continued alienation and isolation of the workforce; another way to disenfranchise and traumatize women and people of color through this liminal digital space. Yet it cannot be overlooked that convenience is used as a shield, a justification for this exploitation that alienates us from the human rights abuses felt by others and motivates us to be complacent uncritical lemmings intrenched in individualized obedience.

 

REFERENCES

Agger, Ben 2004. Speeding Up Fast Capitalism (1st ed) New York: Routledge

Arditi, David 2021. Streaming Culture: Subscription Platforms and the Unending Consumption of Culture. United Kingdom: Emerald Publishing

__________ 2023. Digital Feudalism: Creators Credit, Consumption and Capitalism United Kingdom: Emerald Publishing.

Bates, Laura 2025. The New Age of Sexism: How AI and Emerging Technologies are Reinventing Misogyny Naperville: Sourcebooks

Bauman, Zygmunt 2007. Consuming Life Cambridge: Polity

Brutlag, Brian 2021. “Episode 11: Streaming Culture with Dr. David Arditi” The Sociologist’s Dojo Podcast Retrieved at  https://thesociologistsdojo.libsyn.com/episode-11-streaming-culture-with-dr-david-arditi Retrieved on 2/7/2026

Binkley, Sam 2008. “Liquid Consumption” in Cultural Studies Retrieved at https://emerson.academia.edu/SamBinkley Retrieved on 2/7/2026

Chen, Amber X. 2025. “ A.I. Is on the Rise, and So Is the Environmental Impact of the Data Centers That Drive It: The demand for data centers is growing faster than our ability to mitigate their skyrocketing economic and environmental costs.” In Smithsonian Magazine Retrieved at  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/with-ai-on-the-rise-what-will-be-the-environmental-impacts-of-data-centers-180987379/ Retrieved on 2/7/2026    

Faber, Liz W. 2020. The Computer’s Voice: From Star Trek to Siri Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press  

hooks, bell 2000. Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center Cambridge: South End Press

Jary David and Julia Jary 1991. The Harper Collins Dictionary of Sociology Eugene Ehrlich (eds)  New York: Harper Perennial

Nguyen, Terry and Ben Green 2025. “What Happens When Data Centers Come to Town?” Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition University of Michigan Ford School of Science, Technology and Public Policy Retrieved at https://stpp.fordschool.umich.edu/sites/stpp/files/2025-07/stpp-data-centers-2025.pdf Retrieved on 2/7/2026

Marx, Karl 1992. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume 1” New York: Penguin Classics.

Noble, Safiya Umoja 2018. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism New York: New York University Press

Saarinen, Esa and Mark C. Taylor 1994. Imagologies: Media Philosophy 1st ed. New York: Routledge  

Weber, Max 2019. Economy and Society: A New Translation Keith Tribe (eds) Cambridge Harvard University Press



[1] Thus, due to an understanding of Intersectionality this also means that the division is also across racial, gender, sexuality and disability lines as well as social class

[2] It should be noted that those with money, ability and generational context for one type of technology; that does not translate to others. Somone may know howe to navigate Spotify and download apps, but they do not know the application apparatus of LinkedIn or People Admin

[3]

[4] Our society, especially the current youth generation, has moved away from defining the self as any one thing. Many in the youth culture use certain phrases to illustrate this, such as: “I don’t like labels”, “Rebrand Yourself” “You do You.” “Be a better You” and “Be who you want to be.”

 

[6] This might be a great incentive to get back into physical media. Finite space limits consumption and when you put a blu-ray on a shelf it does not threaten to poison the water supply of an entire town.

[7] The profession of teaching has changed as AI can provide test questions and answers within seconds Making any actual learning immaterial.

[8]  Again the name connotes media illiteracy