Arts and culture become possible within distinct political 'biomes' only slowly, through engagement, and over time. Historically (especially in America), social germination in creatively fertile environments allowed any eventual work to take on the particulars of a community by diffusion. Today, works of art and the final word on those works both pass through each creator or consumer's personal TSA before being allowed into the public sphere. Identity, qualifying adjectives, and scrutiny over 'authenticity' comprise the entire modern lexicon for talking about art and certainly the typical conceptual toolkit for creating it in the post-Internet Age.
Successfully simulating 'cultural works of dissidence' is an uphill battle on the internet (especially for the cynical political operatives of the American hegemon like the Bureau of International Information Programs or the Claremont Institute, armed with astroturfed garbage and foreign funding). This may seem counterintuitive. If the right words are being used in a song, surely we can determine that the right people wrote it. If the signs and signifiers of the righteously indignant are being used, one shouldn't need to engage or wrestle with the work. If the background of the artist is consistent with the content, it passes the thin, one dimensional 'reality' smell test. The art should be good. So when it inevitably isn't, we're left feeling perplexed in a way not unlike the 'uncanny valley' sensation. For those of us who perceive it for what it is the lingering question becomes, "Why can't we ever seem to make something good?"
The same elements of the internet that help to cultivate and disseminate the ideas of dissident political movements seem to preclude those movements from a healthy and well-tended taste for the arts. Utilitarian view-grabbing media production and functional propaganda take precedent over artistry that reflects the world in all its woefully untidied nuances (for obvious reasons), and the power of memetics to uplift challenging political ideas gets apotheosized into something that can just as effectively streamline the arts.
Without release from the confines of the "based/cringe" black box (a dichotomy that, being shorthand, was designed to produce memes), a dissident political ecosystem cannot find the tools to talk about or indeed produce art in a way that tills the land for future crops.
In a similar sense, over-adherence to "based" guidelines restricting any and all mechanics of abstraction (something with perhaps the most evergreen and flexible explanatory and describing capabilities) for fear of 'saying too little' or somehow 'implying the values of interlopers and counterrevolutionaries' will strangle in the crib any artistic sensibilities that could ever lead to a robust and powerful cultural component of a political dissident movement far in the future. A political force's artistic component cannot be so afraid to become "Spirit Cooking" so as to settle for "We Love Our Cops". With regards to the arts, that movement will flounder indefinitely in failure-to-launch syndrome.