Artistic capitalism has been with us for a long while. Yet something is wrong with it. We seem to be too stressed, too extracted, to invest more time and effort and subscriptions into curating our public personae. Back in the early 2010s, the idea that neoliberalism had entered a stage in which “artistic features” (a never-ending demand for originality, the articulation of systems of economic and social value based on flexibility and regulated transgression, the anesthetization of politics, the mobilization of creativity as a driving force of urban gentrification) seemed appealing. Ten years later, artistic capitalism (subjection by individualist subject formation) is decaying. We are not talking about a complete disappearance, a replacement. Things are subtler than that. The artistic imperative, the emphasis on participation and experience, the anxiety linked to like economies and profile capitalism, are still there. Yet there are new things, too. Technofascism, for that matter. This is not your average nightmare: whilst artistic capitalism relied on psychosocial isolation, the performance of narcissism and the establishment of hierarchies through a simulacrum of personal realization-as-differentiation, this new thing does not care about how curating has become part of the vocabulary of professional and personal self-realization or about the interiorization of extractive mode(l)s of self-exploitation. The farewell to artistic capitalism also implies a farewell to the human face of the capitalist imperative. Artistic capitalism relied on the collective fulfilment of the equation art=life; technofascism is creative in other, darker, ways. This essay explores this transition whilst remaining attentive to gaps and alleyways, but also to exit and resistance strategies.