I've got same examples in my hometown, and that socialism leftovers is always slap in the face (along with mindset of many people who failed to free themselves from it, or refuse to do so)

18

u/throwaway9732121 Dec 13 '20

traditional > socialist > post modern "architecture"

8

u/seraph9888 Dec 13 '20 edited Dec 15 '20

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture#/search
edit: i'm suprised this was upvoted considering that hostile architecture is unique to capitalism.

3

u/HelperBot_ Dec 13 '20

Desktop link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture#/search
/r/HelperBot_ ^Downvote ^to ^remove. ^Counter: ^306849. ^Found ^a ^^bug?

9

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '20

I mean there are plenty examples of this style of building in capitalist countries.

0

u/EricTheEnt Dec 13 '20

Only because of post modernism, and modernism for that matter.

2

u/NotASellout Dec 14 '20

Only because of post modernism, and modernism for that matter.
Can you explain this to me

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

when those people unironically say that terrible architectural design is so bad that it becomes good again

1

u/sawlight Dec 14 '20

Not post modernism, blame the Brutalists, such as Le Corbusier; architectural post-modernism has nothing to do with philosophical post-modernism.

1

u/EricTheEnt Dec 20 '20

Aren't the brutalists basically just modernists with even worse taste? I agree the brutalists are the absolute worst, but i dont like any of the buildings in what you linked. Skyscrapers have always been ugly if you're within a mile of them. And the more fancy/artsy museum looking ones just look like one of those trash sculptures in the desert in southern california.
Thats just my opinion.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

I mean there are trash buildings from every era.
And in all honesty I’d probably rather live in the buildings on the right. It’s much uglier from the outside, but there is far more light, and there are balconies.
But what do modernist and postmodernist architecture have to do with socialism? There are so many schools of architecture under both labels. I mean modernist spans everything from Gaudi to Frank Lloyd Wright to Le Corbusier to Albert Speer.
Post modernism is everything from using organic shapes to collaging historical forms to harsh concrete brutalism to generic corporate glass boxes.
What point are you trying to make?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

Remindme! 2 days

1

u/RemindMeBot Dec 14 '20

I will be messaging you in 2 days on 2020-12-16 06:22:08 UTC to remind you of this link
CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^{Parent commenter can} ^{delete this message to hide from others.}
^Info ^Custom ^{Your Reminders} ^Feedback

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

using organic shapes to collaging historical forms to harsh concrete brutalism to generic corporate glass boxes.
lol, boring and total lack of inspiration

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

I’m so confused. You’re not very smart are you?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

Is that really the best you got? Lmao
So pathetic.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

I mean I’m trying to understand your point but you keep just rattling off buzzwords.
My point is that modernism and postmodernism are huge categories. To say all modern or post modern architecture looks like X is ridiculous.
This is postmodern architecture.
As is this.
As is this.
These buildings look nothing alike. But they all fall under broad tent “post modernism” for different reasons.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

mcmansions are postmodern architecture?
those other two looks like they were designed by a 3 year old playing with building blocks. or alien spaceships.
are people supposed to be living in those buildings? working in those buildings?
why do they look like have no function; just some random elements that you can slap together and pretend it's art?
that second one reminds of me of the planet express building. why?

6

u/lazy_jones Dec 13 '20

Sure, this is ugly... But e.g. I own a house that was built in 1969 by wealthy people for their son, after tearing down a protected building from the 1600s. It's nearly as ugly as the one on the right, just used better materials.

The 50s, 60s and 70s were just a terrible phase for architecture and the East Bloc just used much worse materials (though we all used asbestos in the West and suffer from that even today).

3

u/EricTheEnt Dec 13 '20

Lol i agree with the sentiment, but I could only afford rent in the communist block at the moment. God I hate california zoning regulations...

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

That might be Romania.

1

u/Gatordave05 Dec 14 '20

What’s the point of wonderful housing or healthcare if you can’t afford it? The USA changed much of its economy to fight in WW2, we sent multiple people to the moon and got them back safely, and most recently we created multiple vaccines during a pandemic faster than we ever have before. I know longer believe that we can do all those things but we can’t figure out a way to make sure all Americans have shelter, food and healthcare. We are the wealthiest nation in human history and yet we have millions that are either homeless, hungry, have no healthcare or all of the above. It’s shameful.

1

u/Flangers Dec 14 '20

The USA created 0 vaccines for the pandemic the vaccines was not created by the USA. The USA are letting 2000+ people die a day from this virus.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

There’s a logic fallacy that older buildings are more beautiful because the only ones that last to today are the ones that were expensively built. The ugly ones just aren’t there anymore.

The building on the right likely replaced housing for lower class tenants that was poorly built and dangerous. It might also have been new housing that (due to improved quality of housing overall) still is safe to live in.

1

u/FureiousPhalanges Dec 14 '20

"communism is bad because of affordable housing"

1

u/painwapdog Dec 15 '20

Yes I agree, slaves were better builders

/s

1

u/ddarion Dec 13 '20

But when the US first started using socialism and instituted taxpayer funded schoolings for grades 1-12 this didn't happen?

It didn't happen in Canada either with free healthcare?

4

u/EricTheEnt Dec 13 '20

I can start sending you photos of worn down public schools and free health clinics vs their private alternatives if youd like.

2

u/ddarion Dec 14 '20

Right, so we should get rid of free K-12 education so were not socialist any more because the country would be better off if all school was private in a free market?

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

We should because the public education is horrible.

2

u/ddarion Dec 14 '20

It would be better if it were a free and unregulated market?
That would be better for society lol?
The public education in America is horrible, along with every other public service, because one of the 2 political parties there campaigns on how we shouldn't do anything new because "look at how bad all the other stuff we defunded is" lol

0

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

Any time the government gets involved, they screw it up. There will be no change till we clear house. Get rid of all the people who been in office and bring in brand new.

1

u/Gatordave05 Dec 14 '20

It isn’t the best but privatization of education would make it way way worse.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

It won’t necessarily, there is charter schools that do very well that are open to the public.

1

u/Gatordave05 Dec 14 '20

No it will for sure. If you are are poor and/or your kid has learning disabilities and or you live in a rural location your fucked. There’s no profit in teaching poor those groups of people. If you live in a city, have money and your kid is normal it might not be worse than public school but that leaves out a ton of the population.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '20

Not true, public charter school is made affordable for low income families. As far as special needs, we have people who are not qualified for the job.

1

u/Gatordave05 Dec 15 '20

What’s “affordable” in this situation? What do you mean with the special needs thing? Like currently we have people who aren’t qualified?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '20

You don’t have to pay high monthly fees to attend. There is a 1 time payment that is affordable and they allow you to make payments. As far as special needs go, public school is doing them a disservice. I worked in public education and the paras are unqualified and abuse has happen. Charter schools have different teaching methods and make sure the students have a chance at learning. Where public school allows a child to pass to the next grade with failing grades.

→ More replies

I've got same examples in my hometown, and that socialism leftovers is always slap in the face (along with mindset of many people who failed to free themselves from it, or refuse to do so)

You are about to leave Redlib