Imagine what “left wing architecture” looks like after we end manufactured scarcity…
Vast forest arcology-scapes.
Enough to increase the carrying capacity of earth past 300 trillion humans, with vast space enough to live in lush nature…
But no, we have to keep the polluting rents extraction to keep the little people down, to keep the billionaires on top, even if it means even the billionaires have vastly less than they could in egalitarian emancipatarian abundance. At least they have more than others. That’s the most important measure. /s :-/
And pay no attention to the imminence of the bubble popping. ;D
Crazy how detached from reality, compassion, and morality, some are, that they pleep about aesthetics, preferring to keep millions destitute and homeless, to maintain their profiteering gamble.
Enough to increase the carrying capacity of earth past 300 trillion humans, with vast space enough to live in lush nature…
I want what you’re smoking
At the time I was researching the technology and doing the maths, 20 years ago, I was mostly smoking Power Plant. High beta-pinene. Sharp clarity.
Vast forest arcology-scapes.
Go build yourself a house that is a forest archology-scape, something with trees and other plants growing all over the building. Not only is that significantly harder and more expensive to build, but you also have significantly more water intrusion issues, meaning the building won’t last nearly as long and will require horrifically expensive fixes on the regular.
end manufactured scarcity
Making everything a forest archology-scape is a great way to make housing even more scarce and expensive.
significantly harder and more expensive to build, but you also have significantly more water intrusion issues, meaning the building won’t last nearly as long and will require horrifically expensive fixes on the regular.
This sounds like the kind of argument I hear against spaceships for everybody, that’s basically like “We can’t have spaceships! Screen doors don’t work in space!”. Yeah, well, don’t build them like that.
[Edit: Also sounds like people complaining about indoor plumbing, not understanding what that meant, imagining poop all over the place inside. No. We have tubes to manage where stuff goes. Ample dry clean space.]
Go build yourself a house that is a forest archology-scape,
:3
A house that is a forest arcology-scape… lol… just one house, going from horizon to horizon, with vast layers big enough to fit giant trees in… just a house? Seems more than a little opulent-overkill.
And, by myself? :3 If I had the resources, I would not do it just for myself.
Also, I did draft a small example (and even 1000 variations) of a largely self-sustaining house, using environmentally friendly materials, that would strengthen over time, and as intended to be lived in would increase in capacity to produce food and energy over time, and I was enslaved to do this design work while at my worst health, under promise I’d be put in it, if I’d only design a house fit for my needs, then, after much blackmail, slavery, and torture, they defrauded me, and built a design that inverted every key design element for my health, turning a healing home into a torture box, and what’s worse, it cost them at least twice as much. … I still don’t really know why they did that. Can only presume some kind of sadistic narcissistic Munchhausen-by-proxy. Gets me wondering how much more human potential is being squandered for utterly insane reasons. By this worse-than-Sisyphusian task, I have envied Gregor Samsa. … And I shall recover enough health, and build it properly, and more, yet.
Making everything a forest archology-scape is a great way to make housing even more scarce and expensive.
You’re kidding, right? That’s insanely farcical. Not even funny. If we’ve availed the means to build forest arcologyscapes, you think this makes housing building more scarce and expensive? I would love to hear your reasoning behind that, correct or incorrect. I wonder where your’re presuming screen doors. Like… concrete? LOL. Or perhaps unimaginatively in cognitive dissonance presuming aspects of the current economic paradigm would persist along side the deployed ability to construct vast linked forest arcologies…?
Also, just the same as we don’t have to increase the carrying capacity of earth into the hundreds of trillions, nor fill that capacity, and that’s just an example to illustrate some of the headroom we have with proper resource management, we don’t have to make everything on earth a forest arcologyscape.
Anyhoo, please don’t be put off by my reflexively scoffing incredulity, and do elaborate on how “Making everything a forest archology-scape is a great way to make housing even more scarce and expensive”. You might be right. I wouldn’t want to be barking up the wrong tree. (Pun not intended, noticed, and did nothing to avoid.)
But where would all the cars go? /s
“Roads? Where we’re going… we don’t need… … “roads”.” – Doc Emmett Brown, Back To The Future trilogy.
And yet, there’s more greenery around this blocks than you’d see in a US city.
Of course! What use are green spaces? Cant extract profit from it.
Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #102: “Nature decays, but Latinum lasts forever”
:3
Ok, but we have to agree that Soviet blocks are systematic government slop that destroy individuality and make people miserable.
Image looks like Toronto LOL
I can see some of that given the uniformity, but suburbia isn’t exactly all that diverse. So ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah, I know. But these are exclusive to America and the underdeveloped world, and we’re not defending that. It also has similarities with it. Europe has good housing (Though unaffordable) that isn’t suburbia, but modern day commie blocks aren’t exactly affordable in Russia either.
Funny story, suburbia is systemic government slop that destroys individuality, too.
No, we don’t have to agree to that. The abolition of homelessness didn’t make people miserable, guaranteed housing made people thrive.
We’re talking of a country that in 1929 was a preindustrial feudal backwater nation with 85% of the workforce being peasants who, with a bit of luck, worked their landlord’s land with a horse, and without luck they worked it with their bodies. These people lived in poverty conditions without running water, electricity or more heating than a simple fireplace.
By 1970, even after suffering catastrophic destruction at the hands of the Nazism they heroically defeated, it was a fully industrialized country with a majority of the workforce in cities. People, for the first time, enjoyed access to commodities such as running clean water, central heating and electricity. This was literally a revolution for most. This housing was guaranteed, most people accessed it through their work union, and its rent costed a meager 3% of monthly income on average.
The USSR didn’t have the 200 year long process of industrialization that the UK, Germany, France or the USA enjoyed. They literally had to build new, modern housing for a hundred million people in a few decades. The only way possible to do this was with industialized panel construction. Since unemployment was abolished and jobs were guaranteed, everyone was employed in the country. It was literally impossible to build more housing.
This housing was not only guaranteed, it was also designed in walkable neighborhoods with easy access by foot to public transit, basic services such as childcare, shopping and medical attention, and there was a wide variety of cultural centres, sports facilities and other public activities. The socialist country created social people.
I know this, I used to live in a Stalin era house in Moscow. But Stalin’s Russia had a big problem with housing, only Khrucshev fixed it. All of these things may come as a shocker to an American, but they’re quite common in Europe. And it wasn’t that easy to get a house, you had to wait in line for half your life and the system didn’t work with a bit of corruption, like centralized systems always do. Comparing the USSR to western countries is especially bad, because western countries had no regard towards workers, and if we look at the same timeframe we could say they advanced their housing capabilities equally.
I loved to hate these buildings, but behind those grey boxes there was planning. Lots of nurseries, kindergarten, schools, playground, pharmacies, shops, and parks in-between, and public transportation. Whereas modern construction is all for maximizing profit, “luxury residence” everywhere, putting the most of sq meters in every plot, and f.ck the rest.
Also: the size layout of the flats is really good, not like the 39.5sqm random polygons of a modern buildding.
I don’t get the individuality aspect. Do you mean the uniform aesthetic? You can still personalize inside, you know, the place you usually see where you live. I live in a beautiful altbau building in Germany and I couldn’t care less, like fuck do I care about the outside of the house, inside I cannot drew one hole into the wall without it becoming a day long project.
You cannot really express individuality with housing, unless you are building a house from scratch, which few of us do. We can hardly afford to rent anything, it’s not exactly pick and choose?
I’d argue insulation and soundproofing are bigger issues than individuality and making people miserable.
I feel like Vienna did it better. And in European cities that didn’t get bombed to shit in ww2 these houses look out of place and terrible. These houses weren’t build for the benefit of people, but for the benefit of production, like in good old capitalism. They often disregarded the enviroment and historic parts of the city
Yeah.
Not my left.
Dude I love brutalism
Dude I love brutalism
Reminds of one of my fave quotes:
“We are convinced that liberty without socialism is privilege and injustice, and that socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality.” ― Mikhail Bakunin
...
(So, lets have both.)
Brutalism is the architectural style of these buildings, the commenter above isn’t calling them “slavery and brutality”
Reminds
Right wing Architecture
Where are the cops pulling tents down for being illegally homeless?
More like
Very odd to call things like that right-wing given they are most notable for being built in cities. Places well-known for being lefty.
Not really. Who do you think is more likely to sign off on this kind of thing? Certainly not a leftie.
From the top of the comment thread: “Right wing Architecture”
Again, these are most well known in cities, places that aren’t known for being controlled by the right…
They put butt-plugs on those posts?
“Rugged individualism.”
right wing architecture: jail
The tarpe movement was very influencial from the 80s.
Yeah my parents did crack in these blue tents, so nostalgic
The weird thing is that I don’t mind that architecture. Gray buildings? OK. That’s fine.
Of course very old buildings have their own issues. They all do. And so do many new buildings… But looking at this picture, I just wonder what is supposed to be so bad… Shit, I mean, go to modern suburbia or gated communities and tell me you like the look of the cookie cutter homes that will fall apart in twenty years.
I mean the dark grey houses of capitalism using every square centimeter of ground are way more depressing than blocks with a lot of trees around them
Honestly, commieblocks arent that bad. Most of the pictures of them are cherry picked to be the unmaintained, dirty ones, and are exclusively taken in gloomy weather. The houses on the inside are usually good quality as well (though likely not well maintained anymore).
Hell, if you just painted them colourfully, they’d look nice.
Could get artists to do far better than just monochrome per building.
True, but even just the colour there makes the whole thing seem less depressing.
Yep. Colour psychology matters.
Most of the pictures of them are cherry picked to be the unmaintained, dirty ones, and are exclusively taken in gloomy weather.
Look at the trees. They don’t have leaves. The image was definitely taken in winter. That adds a lot to the depression of it.
Didn’t anyone think to scatter a few evergreens around?
E.g. a few pine and yew trees would be nice.
That looks like a SimCity screenshot.
North Korea is actually real life SimCity, that’s why people aren’t allowed in there.
They mixed residential, industrial, and commercial.
/original Sim City had color-coded zones
As someone in a city with tons and tons of commieblocks - the apartments are usually fine, but no, these areas almost always look like shit and are depressing to be around, regardless of the weather.
And this is not one random guy’s opinion, no one I know likes these parts of the city and is excited to live there.
You’re seeing the commieblocks 35 years after the dissolution of the country that built them, and likely 50-70 years after their construction. Anything that old without proper maintenance looks like shit.
I’ve lived my whole life in and around commie blocks and I do not share your sentiment. My blocks are colorful with massive murals painted on their sides making each unique. The green spaces in between also help a lot, there are nice playgrounds for the kids, outdoor gyms etc. All the commodities I need are very close to my living space. I have not seen a single space in my city that looks like one in the picture even though we do have a lot of commie blocks standing around. Although I must say that the city isn’t taking enough care of our buildings. While mine and most others around are holding up fine there’s one that looks like it has rotted over the years. It is really starting to ruin the atmosphere but it’s just an odd one out and I hope proper steps will be taken in the future to restore it back to it’s shape.
Yeah, in Czechia most of the are painted (perhaps not as well as in the original picture)
Concentrating human populations into cities, apartment living, etc is the healthiest thing for our planet.
Forest arcologyscapes would be way healthier.
And/or provisioning everybody with spaceships, and vast spinning orbital habitats
Or even, perhaps, underground habitats.
Or…
~ okay, seems “Concentrating human populations into cities, apartment living, etc” is not the healthiest thing for our planet.
We have so much headroom without the plans of the crooks in charge.
Until we live in Iain Bank’s imagination, that is. I should have clarified
I suppose, yeah, ample range within what you said, to find specific arrangements that do make it true.
Right wing architcture:
those are FUCKING SPIKES to keep people away, the fact that they don’t use daggers instead is strangeThe last one is an actual safety hazard. Imagine someone slipping and falling (think icy sidewalks) and taking one of those to the face.
HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE NOT PIGEONS
Actually, they are. As far as the average conservative cares, both of them are dirty pests that should be driven away.
And under no circumstances should you feed them or they’ll become dependent on you and keep coming back. It’s better to let them die.
Might as well just put em out of their misery note then.
(For anyone who does not know, right wing lunatics are starting to openly advocate for this!)
SPEAK FOR YOURSELF *coo coo*
They’re still shitting all over the park I wish my toddler could more freely play at.
The difference is if you build public bathrooms, the pigeons won’t use them. If humans are shitting outside to a degree it becomes a problem, the problem isn’t the people doing the shitting.
Now, if we could get pigeons to use a bathroom, or even a shitting mat, that would be an achievement.
You’re not wrong but people gotta defecate and frequently have no where to do it. If we cared for our people, with housing in this case, it would benefit literally everyone else too.
Well, not usually.
I have met a homeless furry who was kind of a pigeon.
*yet, theirs always a chance
/s
If someone walking by, falls over that, that’s a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Sorry you got downvoted because that might actually be a good catalyst for undermining hostile architecture.
Talk about taking one for the team though
only commies walk.
And “commies” don’t get to sue?
i think the things on the green bench might be anti-handholding or anti-cuddling things instead. you know, to aid against the display of lewd activity in public (/s)
Instructions unclear: one person sits on other’s lap
i believe this is called “task failed successfully”
You can’t even cuddle these days!!!
They keep the homeless at bay, but wait until the Ayurveda Yoga crowd discovers them. They’ll be worse than a pidgeon infestation.
Or one of those homeless camps that are everywhere now.
Oh they sweep those at least weekly.
As someone who’s grown up in one of those and now rearing a child in Canada, I’d like to tell you that it was an absolutely incredible place to grow up in. The urban planning is such that there’s parks with kid playgrounds sprinkled between the buildings. There’s ample trees. There’s schools and kindergartens at walking distance where kids would often walk alone to/fro. There’s convenient public transit stops. There’s density that lets kids make tons of friends and always have someone to play with without “playdates.” Parenting in such a social environment is so much easier than what parents face in Toronto, it’s not even funny.
E: Oh and the square footage in the average commie block apt is equivalent to a large old-school 2 or 3-bedroom apartment in Toronto. Most are family-sized units.
I still live in one of these, walking my dog is a treat, so many trees, kindergarten, school, pharmacy, groceries, even a pub all within 200 meters.
The part I hate about this place the most is that they made a roundabout in front of the school so parents can drop their kid off by car easier, it’s the most americanized aspect, absolutely disgusting, there are literally two bus stops next to this school going in both directions.
There’s density that lets kids make tons of friends and always have someone to play with without “playdates.”
man, that’s what i missed as a kid sooo much. i would have needed this.
In Germany?
in austria, but it was some conservative rural backwater nowhere
Ah. That makes sense. Let me make you feel better. In some provinces in Canada (or all?) children can’t be left alone, without adult supervision until the age of 12. It’s illegal and parents get in trouble for it. Even leaving your kid to play in your backyard in the suburb while you’re in the shower can become a problem if your bored neighbour calls the authorities. Imagine growing up with that kind of lack of autonomy. Even if there are kids around and even if there’s public transit. I still heven’t figured out how to workaround that for my kid but I suspect I’m gonna be breaking the law. 😂
man, that sucks. i wish you good luck :D
It’s probably fine if you’re used to it but man I’d be so depressed living in such a densely populated city.
Same here. I guess different people like that but I cant be around that many people.
Pandemics happen easier because of dense populations too.
China has incredibly dense cities compared to the USA and the effect of the COVID pandemic was much smaller in deaths per capita
square footage? what kind of weird camera are you using?
That’s my Canada goose brain talking. 😆🪿 It’s literally the common term used to refer to the total area of a housing unit. Here for example a major real estate firm explains the importance of square footage measurement.
For extra entertainment, this is a handy flowchart of Canadian units of measurement:
Wtf 😱 is that real?!
100% and it’s accurate. It’s how we do here. 😅
It’s missing how we measure long distances in driving time. ie: “other city is 3 hours away”
Which is also somewhat accurate in train time too given the sorry state of VIA. 😅
It’s similar in the US. We use gallons for milk and fuel, liters for mid size beverage (like a liter of water or two liters of soda) and fluid ounces for single servings (12 oz can). Pints are used to measure beer served from a keg into a glass. Medications use mililiters.
Large quantities of weed use Pounds and ounces, smaller quantities use grams. Hard drugs pretty much exclusively use metric. Medication uses metric exclusively while most other commerce uses pounds and ounces. Firewood is sold by the “cord”
Yeah. That said, I think on average there’s more imperial in the mix in the US than Canada. Canada went through an intentional Metrification process but it didn’t go all the way through. In part due to trade with the US. 😅
FWIW, a lot of the bougie drinks (fancy soda water, juices, pre-mixed cocktails, etc.) now come in 330mL cans, probably because at 11.7 fl oz, it’s a form of shrinkflation. And those mini cans of soda are technically 222mL.
Also, do note that a U.S. customary pint is different than an imperial pint. (You get 20% more beer in Britain.)
💀
I would measure my apartment in square meters, but I’ve realized I would use the phrase “square footage” to refer to the surface area of a living space. Is there an alternative? “Square meterage” doesn’t work.
“Area”
Area, surface, size.
Living space, m2, usable area
Surface? That’s the term we use in Italian ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That isn’t left wing architecture. It’s USSR architecture. Don’t make everything bad from that dictatorship a part of the left. The Soviet Union wasn’t even real communism. Because communism wouldn’t have a regime consisting of oligarchs and a dictator for example. Just because some people abused something for bad, doesn’t make the thing itself bad.
But these Stalin blocks were actually built an mass to house all the nomads living in the USSR. Most people didn’t have a home, electricity, running water. They used to live in tents. So even though these blocks are ugly and depressing, it made sure people didn’t have to live in a tent with -40°C and Stalin was widely praised for that.
I am a loud critic of the USSR but WW2 destroyed an enormous amount of housing in their country and they spent decades struggling to catch up. Even prior to that, they had WW1 and a civil war negatively impact housing and during the interwar industrialization they focused on increasing industrial output with most home building relegated to cheap temporary construction. A number of the economic issues faced by the USSR were unrelated to any specific political or economic system (for example, the vastness of the country added transportation expenses)
Better than live in ugly apartments than freeze in the harsh Russian winters.
Not completely right. The main reason for panel construction wasn’t war reconstruction, it was rapid industrialization. The USSR in 1929 had 80+% of peasants working the land with a horse or with their hands. By 1970, it was a fully industrialized country with a majority urban population. This required the construction of housing for over a hundred million people over the span of a few decades.
Compare that to England, France, the USA or Germany, which had a few centuries to develop the cities together with their industry since the industrial revolution.
Now compare the housing in the USSR in 1970 with that of Brazil in 1970. The USSR in 1929 was actually less developed than Brazil.
I listed industrialization
Those look very similar in style to the 5-over-1s being built all over the United States. Four floors good, ten floors bad? Or does “left-wing architecture” refer to leaving the trees instead of paving every square inch of outdoor space for parking?
5 or 6 stories are the most you can do with 2x4 construction bought from the local hardware store. They don’t want to spend the money on concrete and use the cheapest shit to furnish the apartment they can. There was a pretty bad fire in my state and they made the fire codes stricter on them. Faux luxury.
Yeah. The live/work/shop complexes are profitable. Especially when you can charge for parking, too.
Stop promoting left-right brain rot. Is what they want
“Stop promoting the knowledge that homelessness was successfully abolished 50+ years ago with socialist policy in a country with much fewer resources and technological development than what we have in 2025”
Yup. Freedom first.
The thing is, a lot of capitalist countries also used to build these, except they stopped due to outrage from real estate barons and NIMBYs losing value on their buildings.
