X Close

Times Square statue is a relic of the BLM era

'Grounded in the Stars' by Thomas J. Price. Credit: Times Square/Michael Hull

'Grounded in the Stars' by Thomas J. Price. Credit: Times Square/Michael Hull

May 8 2025 - 1:00pm

Five years ago, a 12-foot bronze statue of a young, plus-sized black woman in Times Square would have been considered reflective of its time. But today, Thomas J. Price’s Grounded in the Stars — unveiled in April 2025 and scheduled to remain until mid-June — feels more like a museum piece from the bygone era of 2020, when groups like Black Lives Matter dominated world discourse and such installations still possessed the power to draw attention. Today, the installation stands as a testament to how yesterday’s purportedly radical gestures have calcified into mediocre establishment art.

Price’s massive bronze figure, described by Times Square Arts as confronting “preconceived notions of identity and representation,” is the latest in a series of nearly identical statues the British artist has installed in cities worldwide. In Rotterdam, he erected “Moments Contained” in 2022; across the United Kingdom, his Hackney Windrush commission and Fourth Plinth nomination have cemented his status as the go-to sculptor when civic bodies need to demonstrate their diversity credentials. It’s a lucrative niche Price has carved for himself: churning out formulaic bronzes that let institutions feel progressive while securing hefty commissions.

The language surrounding Price’s work reads like a script of art world jargon. His sculptures are described as “silent totems for change” that challenge “the unmediated immortalization of triumphant figures.” The accompanying press materials, with references to “psychological embodiment,” “social signifiers,” and “predetermined value,” could easily be mistaken for text generated by artificial intelligence — the kind of boilerplate diversity-speak that major institutions now deploy with the ease of filling out a tax form.

The controversy that erupted around Price’s Rotterdam statue “Moments Contained” offered a window into the tensions surrounding this type of art. Dutch columnist Rosanne Hertzberger described the Rotterdam statue as “mundane, boring,” questioning why someone “who has accomplished nothing in particular” should be commemorated. She went further, arguing that “simply being a woman, having a disability, wearing a headscarf, being dark-skinned, and better still, a combination of all these, is now enough to be celebrated.”

Her critique, which set off a media firestorm in the Netherlands, gets at a fundamental tension: these sculptures aren’t celebrating individual achievement, but rather, placing stock black bodies into spaces previously reserved for historical figures of note. Price himself describes his characters as “everymen” and “everywomen” who are “amalgamated from multiple sources” using “a hybrid approach of traditional sculpting and intuitive digital technology.”

One wonders where this sort of art goes next. When diversity itself becomes a kind of prompt for generic, almost AI-style art — a quota to be satisfied rather than a revolution to be waged — it prompts questions about whether any of this challenges power structures or merely gives them another coat of paint.

That’s the unavoidable trajectory of protest movements: from radical disruption to institutional absorption. Price’s statue, standing impassively in Times Square as tourists snap selfies, may well be the perfect monuments to this process — a bronze embodiment of how quickly yesterday’s radical gesture becomes today’s safe bet, already on its way to becoming tomorrow’s footnote. When questions of identity are foregrounded once again, as vestigial votives like this indicate they surely will be, one can only hope more vital forms of resistance stand ready.


Oliver Bateman is a historian and journalist based in Pittsburgh. He blogs, vlogs, and podcasts at his Substack, Oliver Bateman Does the Work

MoustacheClubUS

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam