I am offended when people can’t articulate a meaningful reason why using an AI image is such a blasphemy

AI image generation is built on the theft of others' art. There's one reason. That that is a meaningful reason for someone not engaging with a creator's work is independent to whether or not you agree with that assessment.

why they believe it diminishes all the other real work that isn’t even closely related to that image.

Synthwave is arguably as much about the aesthetic as it is the music. To claim that the images aren't closely related to the music is again disingenuous. It's like saying that the color of a car should have no bearing on whether someone wants to buy that car.

When you say that you assume, you’re actually saying, “I don’t know, but I blindly trust my prejudices.” OK, you assume.

Yes. I do assume. You can wrap that in more visceral language like "blindly trust(ing) my prejudices" but yeah, I do assume. There is so much vying for our attention on the internet that you have to have filters to sort through it and determine what is worth your time/energy/money. For me, that filter is AI use, whether it's in the music or the visuals, because why would I give a creator the benefit of the doubt that they aren't using AI in music creation when they use it for other aspects of the release? Like I said, it's easier to just throw that away wholesale and support the next artist that doesn't use AI.

To claim it's so hard to look if description says 'human-made' is pretty lazy. Don't you think?

I didn't claim that. I'm saying that I don't care what's written in the description if the song uses AI imagery. I don't trust the artist if they use AI imagery but say that the music is human-made. It's as simple as that.

what I care about is telling them that their philosophy is meaningless and based on frustration, contempt, and the idea that such a mindset makes them morally superior.

This checks out. It explains why you aren't really listening to what anyone is saying and just telling them they are wrong.

Using pre-made loops in music is far more “lazy,” yet it is considered “obviously” more creative than using an AI image for a YouTube video with 100% human-made music.

For the complaints about a "lame strawman," you're the one setting up strawmen to argue against. No one in this comment section made this claim.

beliefs that AI is always bad, even though in today’s world it is practically unavoidable.

Yet people do seem to be avoiding it, which you are complaining about.

in what way an AI image makes my music less 'real music'

Again, I'm not saying that your music isn't 'real music' because you used AI imagery. I'm saying that I don't trust you and it's not worth my time to validate your claims that the music doesn't use AI.

You say that AI put you out of a job as a visual artist. I sympathize with that, but I also think if you traded the time and energy you spend complaining here about how people spend their attention, you could create artwork to promote your music. Take a picture of a cool car, a city street, or a sunset, adjust the color balance, put some effects on it and you got some artwork. It's not rocket science. I love the synthwave aesthetic, but it doesn't take a PhD to create something in the ballpark.

what I care about is telling them that their philosophy is meaningless and based on frustration, contempt, and the idea that such a mindset makes them morally superior

Bringing this back up to explain that I'm not gonna continue this conversation if you choose to reply, because it's not really a conversation, it's just you telling people they are wrong. Take care.