It is becoming increasingly clear that Brahmins have a problem with technology.

Just as the “junk dealers” who the pioneering Futurist F.T. Marinetti attacked a hundred years ago opposed all innovation and industrialization in favor of empty veneration of long-dead Rome, today’s elite of Whole Foods-shopping pseudo-agrarians harbor a reflexive—and powerful—distaste for all technological achievement that won’t give them smaller computers or shinier phones.

Take this painting as an example. In 1991, scientists from DNA Plant Technology attempted to create a tomato that could better stand cold storage and frost, by splicing in cold-resistance genes isolated from the winter flounder. Although the engineered tomato did not perform well in cold-resistance tests and was never marketed, its mere existence in the greenhouse was pounced on by anti-genetic modification protesters, who proceeded to make it a major part of their marketing efforts. Or, as Jenny M. Smith, the ‘artist’ of the painting, wrote:

In recent years I have become increasingly concerned with the quality of food we consume. We are led to believe that preservatives somehow enhance food, that antibiotics and hormones are perfectly safe additions to the meat and dairy products we eat and that processed foods are an acceptable alternative to fresh produce. There is also the alarming technology of genetically engineered foods. In my painting “Oh That’s Disgusting” (titled after my granddaughter’s reaction to the painting when it was explained to her) I have shown a process that seems to be straight out of science fiction. However, this is completely true. Scientists have created a frost-resistant tomato plant by adding an antifreeze gene from a cold-water fish to it.

Straight out of science fiction? Well, yes. It should come as no surprise that technological advancements would appear to be straight out of a genre dedicated to speculation about the possible uses of technological advancements. Apparently, nothing in the real world should resemble anything from a genre containing many books depicting man advancing his knowledge and conquering the stars.

On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the world’s first artificial satellite, allowing scientists throughout the West to better study the upper atmosphere and beginning the Space Age. Exactly two years later, they launched Luna 3 and captured the first pictures of the far side of the Moon, forever blocked from the view of those on Earth.

In 1961, Yuri Gagarin, the first cosmonaut, orbited the Earth aboard Vostok 1; and within the decade, our country sent men into orbit around the Moon for the first time in human history, and sent with them a television camera which they used to transmit back the most-watched broadcast of the time: a reading of the first ten verses of Genesis, seen by half a billion people. (Then atheist activists sued the government over it.)

And on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the Moon.

That is straight out of science fiction. Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, both pioneering science fiction authors, wrote about it—the former in 1865. One must hope neither Jenny M. Smith nor her granddaughter would call landing on the Moon ‘disgusting’.

But why did she promote her presumably young granddaughter’s reaction to the process by naming the painting after it? And why is the thing in a university’s art gallery? (For that matter, what is the Oregon State University College of Agricultural Sciences doing with an art gallery in the first place, and why is the painting priced at $900?)

This attitude is not limited to one artist; it is common among Brahmins, from the West Coast elite who cause preventable epidemics by refusing to vaccinate their children to the ‘health juice’ company that opposed pasteurization until it caused an E. coli outbreak to the continued popularity among Brahmins of the germ-denying GMO alarmist Bill Maher.

Progressivism threatens technological advancement by subordinating it to political correctness, but this is not the only problem: many of its adherents simply don’t like that advancement, and see it as disgusting, uncool, a threat to their precious ‘authenticity’ and perhaps their bodily fluids. Our society will soon have to choose between the two: on the one hand, the tradition of valuing increased knowledge of the world and practical application of knowledge; and on the other, a totalitarian cult that promises utopia but delivers only tyranny, degeneracy, and societal collapse.

The choice will not be difficult. To paraphrase Marinetti, America has been a marketplace of junk-dealers for far too long.