I'm firmly a modernist. It's the future they stole from us and few things make me angrier than 1900-1930s art history. Calling it modernism and modern art was such a misstep. When I ran /r/modernart our #1 post and #1 removed post was people who mistook that word for contemporary and had no idea what modern meant in relation to premodern or postmodern. It's such a stupid term with no better substitute.
Its also not even consistent within the art world. there are entire branches of arts that dont start calling themselves modern until the '60s.
Confidently naming this time the Now Period and the End of History, as all things that can happen already did
The Contemporary Era began four hundred years ago...
It's fine, future historians will just label this the Late Iron Age or the Steel Age or the Silicon Age.
like how World War 1 and 2 are gonna get covered as a single event, or how the US is gonna be mistaken for latter half of the British Empire.
Historians like Enzo Traverso or Losurdo already argue this, that WWI and WWII are actually a long Second Thirty Years War
The late revival of the roman empire.
or how the US is gonna be mistaken for latter half of the British Empire.
I mean the world wars and the interwar period is basically a 30 years war situation.
WWI is pretty intimately linked with the race for Africa and the colonial wars. There’s definitely a telling of 20th century history where you treat the two world wars as discrete events, with WWI marking the end of the colonial wars, and WWII marking the beginning of the Cold War and decolonization.
Is WWII not just an extension of these colonial wars by the powers that "lost" in the race for colonies? Japan attempts to take the Asian colonial possessions of the British and the Americans, the Italians attempt to take the North African colonial possessions of mainly France and Britain (as well as their own colonial war in Ethiopia), and Germany attempts to apply colonialism as well as colonial tactics of control and genocide to Eastern Europe in its mission to create colonial "living space".
Yes Germany, Italy and Japan were the upcoming revisionist powers that tried to disrupt the old world order of the Anglosphere and France. The United States had already supplanted Britan pre-bellum as the largest economy and the internal closed market of the british empire was threatened to be opened to the dollar by south africa. While Russia was seen as a threat due to its (potential) and later realized industrialization.
Thats why Lenin predicted the Pacific war from Japan against the United states, before it happened.
nah, this is the age of petroleum and microplastics.
The age of PFAS and Covid
We should do a bad job of record keeping so they call it the second dark age.
with how easily digital records decay i've seen it argued that this could be the case
I think they might have a reason other than our records keeping to call our time the second dark age
later bronze age collapse
The right angle age. Cause all of our buildings are boring squares instead of shapes that work with the environment
Guy holding a Bronze axe circa 2000 BC: "I've got the best idea for what to call right now".
This confused me to no end when I was younger. I would also like to flay their soul.
The industrial era has always made more sense to me. It begins with the printing press and the mechanisation of all production eventually ending with ww2 which neatly leads us into the Information Age.
This is a tangent, but the fact that we just decided to term an entire period of history which reaches back decades as "contemporary" is the actual end of history
Attending my first "modern philosophy" class as an undergraduate and starting with the 1600s was very confusing.
Me, 30 years in the future, living in the post-contemporary age, posting this same thing on the post-internet
modern architecture: steel and glass
modern philosophy: "I think therefore I am" -- Descartes
yeah, shit's very very silly
Stalinist architecture is modern and it actually looks very nice.
i don't have a problem with it, i'm just pointing out that in these two different disciplines the word "modern" denotes two periods that differ by a couple hundred years.
They probably also called themselves modern in the past. We usually consider what "epochs" or "eras" are after the fact.
Yeah but see now we can have post modern and post post modern and then we can decide we're gonna do re modern so we can do pre pre re modern and then pre re modern and then re modern and then post re modern and then post post re modern and then we can do pre pre re re modern and pre re re modern and
Mo'dern, mo'problems
counterpoint, it brings me joy to call something from 1816 modern 
I always just assumed it was like the orange the fruit/orange the colour situation, and the era was called the modern era before people were like “oh this is a modern [meaning new/contemporary] kitchen”
We used to call it the Napoleonic era, but then he died and we haven't really come up with something good since.
I thought modern ended around like the 90s or so. Its Post-Modern now
It's been post-modern at least since the 1940s. The world wars made it clear that modernity and it's promises were in crisis
Early maturity is finding out as a child during literature class that the “modern” times are centuries old...
Yup.
I just read this on redsails and it's relevant.
[Bukharin's educational materia]l reduces the task to asserting that one is a special person simply because they were born in the present time, and not in any one of past centuries. We might recall here the story of the French petit bourgeois who discovered the word “contemporary” and thought it made him sound fancy so he printed it on his business card. In every time there has been a past and a present, so “being of the present” is a boast only good for ridicule.
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.