Why is ensuring housing authoritarian? Isn’t the cheapest most depressing architecture authoritarian? No one says it had to be depressing and lack deicent design… unless the dictator mandates it. No true left wing design would look this bleak and forced.
If you’ve come to look at a given architectural style (or any object for that matter) in its abstracted, ahistorical form, then you may not find much value nor truth to what it actually signifies. You must instead look at the material conditions that led to its creation.
First of all rutalist architecture emerged in the USSR after the end of WW2 after the economy and the entire infrastructure of the country were entirely wiped out. Simplified construction techniques using concrete were revolutionary in the sense that they were efficient and easy to streamline on a national scale for millions of people on the one hand, while being cost effective on the other hand. Whilst the rate of homelessness was not decreasing (if not increasing) in capitalist economies, socialist countries were at the vanguard of providing free housing for everyone.
In short, brutalist architecture was shaped by the material conditions of the post-war era and developed further as the economy progressed in later decades. This is simply because policies and social and cultural phenomena are not the mere product of ideas and thoights as much as the material conditions which are the basis for every human movement.
Secondly, the term “brutalist” does not give credit to what the Soviets and other socialist countries have achieved in the architectural fields. Most pictures that are publicized on the Internet picture either abandoned and unmaintained buildings or pictured thata are taken in the gloomiest period of winter, since this id what is believed to fit the narrative or the “aesthetics” of socialist architecture.
Lastly, in reality there isn’t really an artistic style that dictates what leftist architecture should look like. If you search through pictures of Soviet architecture or even DPRK or PRC architecture for something recent, you will find that they vary so much in colors and shapes, because it all depends on the architect’s individual and distinct taste. Rather, what distinguishes leftist (or your so-called “authoritarian”) architecture is that it serves the needs of the proletariat, contrary to capitalist societies that boast about their individualism.
Generally left wing is ‘making things better for people would be nice’
And is mostly bitterly divided between ‘cool, so let’s get started!’ And 'we must form a committee and personality cult to do capitalist accellerationism, only then can we murder everyone in the first group and then do the thing’ with some absolutely batshit jewels of ideology mixed in.
And the commie blocks are really in the center of that venn diagram. The party that made them was soaked in leftist blood, but the reason they look like that is because building them fast meant people got homes faster, so they were less concerned with giving each one a unique style.
Yep. They did a lot of bullshit and I’d argue they were profoundly reactionary, but the Bolsheviks were still minimum viable communist, and did a lot of communism when it wasn’t purge time.
Which sounds and was pointlessly awful, but I have spent a lot of time with people on the streets, and I think that’s still less terror, less pointless death and suffering.
And is mostly bitterly divided between ‘cool, so let’s get started!’ And 'we must form a committee and personality cult to do capitalist accellerationism
Who are those “cool, let’s get started” leftists, and what housing did they build? Just so I can compare their housing to that of the “personality cult capitalist accelerationists”.
Dunno, not my department. Like I said, at least a few that I’ve personally seen, but they also don’t try to kill other leftists for no fucking reason. So it’s probably easier.
Ah, I see, there are no real examples of “cool, let’s get started” leftists building millions of housing units, so you’re comparing an actually existing state having to deal with capitalist and fascist subversion in a world dominated by capitalism, with idealistic nonexisting societies. That’s your problem right there. You’re welcome!
I’d gladly go to a Soviet Union if it existed, unfortunately it didn’t survive the capitalist subversion attempts I explicitly mentioned.
No need to get angry about confronting the reality that you don’t have actually existing historical leftist figures in power that you can praise. If Rosa Luxembourg had gotten to power and hadn’t been murdered by Nazis and Social Democrats, you’d hate her too.
Left wing is so loosely defined you can ask two people and get three answer’s. In this case the poster seems right wing and for him left wing=USSR. Ignoring that, this building style is probably the most efficient way to house as many people for as cheap as possible as fast as possible, which seems pretty left wing to me
Why is total efficiency left wing? Isn’t maximizing profit right wing? The buildings should be built to maximize happiness of the people who, together, decide on the architecture… at the expense of profit.
efficiency and maximum extracted profit are not the same thing
the modern western housing construction process from start to finish is an incredibly inefficient process which is designed around minimizing as much risk and maximizing as much profit to the financiers, nothing about it is designed around effecient home-building.
Isn’t this authoritarian architecture and not left wing architecture?
That moment when ensuring housing for everyone and eradicating homelessness is considered “authoritarian architecture”.
And let’s pretend like we know what makes architecture “authoritarian.”
Why is ensuring housing authoritarian? Isn’t the cheapest most depressing architecture authoritarian? No one says it had to be depressing and lack deicent design… unless the dictator mandates it. No true left wing design would look this bleak and forced.
If you’ve come to look at a given architectural style (or any object for that matter) in its abstracted, ahistorical form, then you may not find much value nor truth to what it actually signifies. You must instead look at the material conditions that led to its creation.
First of all rutalist architecture emerged in the USSR after the end of WW2 after the economy and the entire infrastructure of the country were entirely wiped out. Simplified construction techniques using concrete were revolutionary in the sense that they were efficient and easy to streamline on a national scale for millions of people on the one hand, while being cost effective on the other hand. Whilst the rate of homelessness was not decreasing (if not increasing) in capitalist economies, socialist countries were at the vanguard of providing free housing for everyone.
In short, brutalist architecture was shaped by the material conditions of the post-war era and developed further as the economy progressed in later decades. This is simply because policies and social and cultural phenomena are not the mere product of ideas and thoights as much as the material conditions which are the basis for every human movement.
Secondly, the term “brutalist” does not give credit to what the Soviets and other socialist countries have achieved in the architectural fields. Most pictures that are publicized on the Internet picture either abandoned and unmaintained buildings or pictured thata are taken in the gloomiest period of winter, since this id what is believed to fit the narrative or the “aesthetics” of socialist architecture.
Lastly, in reality there isn’t really an artistic style that dictates what leftist architecture should look like. If you search through pictures of Soviet architecture or even DPRK or PRC architecture for something recent, you will find that they vary so much in colors and shapes, because it all depends on the architect’s individual and distinct taste. Rather, what distinguishes leftist (or your so-called “authoritarian”) architecture is that it serves the needs of the proletariat, contrary to capitalist societies that boast about their individualism.
Generally left wing is ‘making things better for people would be nice’
And is mostly bitterly divided between ‘cool, so let’s get started!’ And 'we must form a committee and personality cult to do capitalist accellerationism, only then can we murder everyone in the first group and then do the thing’ with some absolutely batshit jewels of ideology mixed in.
And the commie blocks are really in the center of that venn diagram. The party that made them was soaked in leftist blood, but the reason they look like that is because building them fast meant people got homes faster, so they were less concerned with giving each one a unique style.
Yep. They did a lot of bullshit and I’d argue they were profoundly reactionary, but the Bolsheviks were still minimum viable communist, and did a lot of communism when it wasn’t purge time.
Which sounds and was pointlessly awful, but I have spent a lot of time with people on the streets, and I think that’s still less terror, less pointless death and suffering.
Who are those “cool, let’s get started” leftists, and what housing did they build? Just so I can compare their housing to that of the “personality cult capitalist accelerationists”.
We’re around. And I personally have-though admittedly not much; I’m not one for manual labor.
So “we’re around-type” leftists have built how many homes exactly?
Dunno, not my department. Like I said, at least a few that I’ve personally seen, but they also don’t try to kill other leftists for no fucking reason. So it’s probably easier.
Ah, I see, there are no real examples of “cool, let’s get started” leftists building millions of housing units, so you’re comparing an actually existing state having to deal with capitalist and fascist subversion in a world dominated by capitalism, with idealistic nonexisting societies. That’s your problem right there. You’re welcome!
‘Having to deal with capitalism’ there it is. Last time I credit you murderhobo shitsticks with anything.
Go back to the soviet Union.
I’d gladly go to a Soviet Union if it existed, unfortunately it didn’t survive the capitalist subversion attempts I explicitly mentioned.
No need to get angry about confronting the reality that you don’t have actually existing historical leftist figures in power that you can praise. If Rosa Luxembourg had gotten to power and hadn’t been murdered by Nazis and Social Democrats, you’d hate her too.
Left wing is so loosely defined you can ask two people and get three answer’s. In this case the poster seems right wing and for him left wing=USSR. Ignoring that, this building style is probably the most efficient way to house as many people for as cheap as possible as fast as possible, which seems pretty left wing to me
Why is total efficiency left wing? Isn’t maximizing profit right wing? The buildings should be built to maximize happiness of the people who, together, decide on the architecture… at the expense of profit.
efficiency and maximum extracted profit are not the same thing
the modern western housing construction process from start to finish is an incredibly inefficient process which is designed around minimizing as much risk and maximizing as much profit to the financiers, nothing about it is designed around effecient home-building.
Making anything better is left wing.