> Liminalism (if we can christen this as a movement, and we should) is a form dedicated to the discovery of digital found art. It is important not just because of its content, but because it signals the migration of critical terminology and thinking into popular discourse in a truly democratic sense, independent of the traditional confines of the art industry as expressed in exhibitions, galleries, and museums.

This is not the language of an elitist.

If anything, it sounds like someone defending Liminalism's inclusion in the contemporary canon from arrogant elitists.

It’s just one group of elitists slap-fighting another.

Are we really supposed to take seriously that “liminalism is the defining aesthetic of our time”?

> This is not the language of an elitist.

It absolutely is. Someone claiming to tell you what is “important”, what is “truly democratic”, in contradiction to “traditional” structures is elitism at its most insufferable.