Whenever there's a discussion around the validity of any art form, you can find the answer you're looking for simply by looking at where people's comets are parked.
I like how it intersects and comments on the marxist critique on art. I like how Dada is more concerned with expression than rules, and flatly rejects ethics and conformity.
I think the thing that bothers me, just generally, is how well Dadaist arguments hold up today. Not just around discussions of art, effort, and ethics - but around the critique of the larger art world. It's been over a hundred years at this point, and not a damned thing has changed.
We should all be out there, exploring new frontiers, means, and methods of creative possibility. Instead, we just sit here, beating at the same dead horse of who is and isn't allowed to walk through that door and use the word "artist" to describe themselves, like that means anything.
A century ago, there were guys writing books about the imminent death of painting. And the only difference between then and now is the tools that will be the implements of its destruction.