You must log in or # to comment.
What’s right wing architecture?
Blue tarps? But they’re blue! haha, you wings are so silly with your flapping about
But seriously, have they not seen an apartment building or strip mall before? The architecture where I live is far from inspiring, it’s just strip mall after strip mall for miles, then some big block office buildings. Yippee
Prisons silly.
That’s communist dude not left, I m sure Denmark which is a socialistic country is left for you too, anyway do some traveling and stop spreading bollocks
It’s not even communist. Western Propaganda really created a false impression on this term…
I don’t think we really had communism yet on the world.
We’ve really had communism in the world.
You just don’t agree that it’s communism.
Reality is real, your idealistic purity is an impossibility. Deal with how things are, not how you wish them to be
We never had communism in the same way we never had a person fly by flapping their arms after jumping of a roof. It’s not that we did not try, it just does not end with a flying person.
To have communism, you have to concentrate all the wealth and power in some sort of government so that people don’t own “the means of production”. And when you concentrate all power in the government, human nature produces some sort of dictatorship.
human nature is not an explanation, it is hand waiving. and communism is a stateless society. no one should believe anything you’ve said here.
there is a cure for political illiteracy.
human nature is not an explanation
Yes, it is handwaving, because I ain’t spending time writing paragraphs of shit anyone with two brain cells to rub together can easily figure out on their own.
communism is a stateless society
Just because you string words together does not mean they mean something. If people don’t own/control the means of production, someone else does. Either you have private capital or a governing body. Calling it “stateless society” means nothing. That is actual handwaving of real issues.
“Just because you string words together does not mean they mean something. If people don’t own/control the means of production, someone else does. Either you have private capital or a governing body. Calling it “stateless society” means nothing. That is actual handwaving of real issues.”
communism is a stateless classless moneyless society. your semantic game doesn’t change the facts
communism is a stateless classless moneyless society
So it’s a fantasy where everyone magically knows what to do, how and when. Then does it with no incentive or punishment. No coordinators, police, or anything else required. Ok, clear. Now can we get back to real world ideas?
Because if there is anyone who has the ability to order people to do something and punish them for not doing it or decide distribution of incentives, that is called a government. No matter how you try to rename it or handwave it.
“Yes, it is handwaving, because I ain’t spending time writing paragraphs of shit anyone with two brain cells to rub together can easily figure out on their own.”
this also is not evidence
Also, it helps not to reduce image saturation to zero and have the blocks somewhat decently maintained. A bit of paint makes also a huge difference:
https://bankfoto.info/zdjecia/petrzalka-3/ (Petrzalka, Bratislava)
If you look at the 🌳 , the don’t have leaves, indicating that the picture was taken on a cloudy autumn day. Everything looks depressing on a cloudy autumn day.
and/or desaturated to further enforce the effect…
Not the best example: Eastern-European countries tend to overcompensate and overdo the painting, making the result too noisy. Nordic cities look much better, precisely because they choose muted and coordinated colors, and usually paint the whole house instead of making patchy blobs. It so happens that khrushchyovkas are again better at it too, because they were built smaller and painted in one color, often muted orange or brown.
The bottom image is heavily tuned to have more vibrant colors. No place in real life has such strong hues. I’d suspect that place in real life looks very much like the above image
Gamla Stan is beautiful, no the colours are not as surreal and exagerated in real life but it is a colourful place also in reality.
Could be, but it’s still not the patchy mess that Soviet blocks tend to be colored into. New builds in Russia are often painted those very strong hues that apparently no place has. It’s horrible.
Agreed, that looks pretty horrible. It’s more due to the lack of any color harmony than the strong hues. There are places with strong hues that look good imo, like Burano
I did not say that I would consider those buildings in Petrzalka the height of all taste and beauty but the issue with it is not the colour of the buildings. It is the urban layout on ground level and the rundown horrendously car centric design. That is really dragging the area down. On the plus side, there is so much greenery even with all of that, that it is not looking grey there, certainly not during Spring-Autumn.
PS: Bratislava is west of Stockholm, has nothing to do with Orthodox Europe and Slovakia stopped being part of the East block almost as long ago as it was ever part of it.
Forbidden You don’t have permission to access this resource.
Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
I can think of some things
Quiznos :( 💔
Please be AI. Im overstimulated just from the still image
Pretty sure this is Breezewood, Pennsylvania.
Nah, this picture is old. I definitely remember seeing it in the 2010-2020 era.
Take any exit off of almost any motorway in America and you’ll be met with this.
50% chance there’s a Cracker Barrel just out of frame left.
It isn’t.
Vehicular manufacturing utopia core
I love this kind of thread. It always attracts some guy who finds it necessary to point out that in the USSR people had to endure the absolute horrors of having roommates. I think I saw him phrase it as them having “survived” roommates once.
I mean, roommates are definitely a form of horror. For every well adjusted person out there, several exist that never learned to clean up after themselves or think of how what they do impacts another person.
Hell, there are a lot of people who actually take delight in the suffering of others. Imagine trying to convince your roommate to do the dishes more than once a month and they’re laughing at you.
The blocks were built en masse with the exact purpose of escaping communal living that proliferated during rapid urbanization of the 1930s, so that connection is quite a stretch.
Its not the roommates that bothers me it is the listening devices and constantly playing propaganda that is illegal to turn off, or forced “vacations” in labor camps for disagreeing with government decisions.
Sure. But that makes it all the funnier when someone voluntarily chooses to focus on the roommates to criticize the USSR.
Right wing architecture
Why is the background smooth behind the swastika?
Oh, snap. Got 'em.
It would help if you found something less dope-looking. This pic is like 1920s New York, but with a swastika.
Coincidence?? It’s pretty easy to imagine the swastika replaced with a dollar sign
True, but I can’t hate old NYC architecture. That stuff was cool. In fact it’s no coincidence either that last good-looking Soviet housing was during Stalin’s era, as he liked New York’s art-deco architecture and demanded it be used in the USSR (with Moscow State University’s Ramenki campus being the most famous example).
More right wing architecture
I bet the people in that tower complain bitterly about the ‘poors’ spoiling their view.
Right wing architecture:
It’s called city planning. I don’t know where this is but the commie blocks where I was born were within walking distance of shops, cafes, schools, had cheap central heating, all had children’s parks and green areas between buildings, and public transport to the city center. All at dirt cheap prices since they were not built for profit, and could only be owned by people living in them or rented from the state.
People in the west never hear anything positive about communism, so…
Everyone knows what their news talk about. A few people read books, but not many.
I would not want to live under communism, but it certainly is portrayed as more crazy than it actually is.
There are zero tv shows about communist people doing normal things in life. Its pretty much a banned topic that people go out and party, watch movies, eat pizza… Same as in the west. We are not very different.
And if you travel, you see this. Its just people. But yes, the leaders are insane. In every major nation.
yes: right-wing architecture:
The best architecture isn’t politically-tainted, but designed to be beautiful first.
And your examples are actually political.
Yes: my point is that successful architecture is neither left-wing nor right-wing, and that architecture which is identifiably left- or right-wing is ugly and nauseating, almost by definition.
Alterlaa is fantastic. Incredible resident retention as well. Lot’s of multigenerational residencies as well. They lower half has huge ass balconies, large enough for trees, bushes or even a small garden. They are also desigend to support all of that.
They have tons of spaces for all sorts of clubs, gyms and they all have sizeable swimming pools on top as well. Car free all around with nicely cared for park area in between everything, a mini shopping mall as part of the complex, a subway station on its own and direct access to a major cycling/walking trail …
As context, these buildings have sizeable parks in between them. They also house different gyms, saunas, swimming pools and multi-storey apartments rented from the city of Vienna. “Wohnpark Alterlaa”
Best I can do is indsutrial brutalism
Left wing ideals implemented by greedy self serving capitalists is more like it.
Right wing architecture
Once you notice hostile design, you see it everywhere.
My favorite is the bench with no shade. It’s a giant fuck you. You could sit here however you are going to sit in the full force of the sun.
So many tiny Pharaohs!
Honest question: WTF is this?
Anti homeless / hostile architecture. Prevents people sitting or sleeping there.
This blows my naive European mind. To make an area deliberately unusable for anything by anyone is wild. At least those hostile benches can be sat on.
You should see Madrid. Dickface, the major, has an special place in his rotten heart for hostile-to-people anything.
The amount of bench/public spaces without shades or benches you cannot sleep on are legion in Europe, too.
I was surprised to find the new trainstation in a Finnish town has benches that prevent lying down on them. Apparently someone’s been taking notes here 😕
It’s to ensure homeless people can’t sleep somewhere.
This doesn’t look slave plantation-y enough.
I also can’t find the pointy white hat.
I assume they had a problem with cars parking there.
Some insect is going to have an existential crisis finding those
Could they not have just put a lazy garden or something in instead…
That seems like a lot more work and expense
It’s also not left wing architecture. It’s the cross roads of a left wing housing initiative, and a right wing refusal to spend money on the public good. What you get is something akin to unsecured prison architecture.
State capitalism architecture
This architectural style is called, no kidding, Soviet Brutalism, and was the primary architectural style featured in the Soviet Union from the 1950s to the 1980s.
It’s a divergence from Western brutalism, focusing more on utopian and futuristic themes.
So, no, it’s not anything political. It’s a cultural thing.
Boston City Hall, for example:
The campus of the Rochester Institute of Technology, a.k.a. “Brick City”:
So, no, it’s not anything political. It’s a cultural thing.
Soviet housing either followed or was contemporary with Le Corbusier’s ideas of affordable ‘habitation units’, the now-famous cookie-cutter blocks with minimal decoration. The OOP is quite correct in calling it leftist, since the purpose was to have lots of cheap housing: the USSR had huge expansion of it during the fifties-seventies, with massive migration from rural areas to cities (following the less-neat redistribution of housing, wooden barracks, and communal living in the thirties).
Can’t say I like the outcome too much, because arguably same population density can be achieved with lower-rising houses, since they don’t require huge areas between them to have any sunlight. Khrushchev-era districts can be much cozier than later ones, since five-storey buildings are placed closer and have trees right outside the windows.
As was aptly, stated by another commenter here:
It’s also not left wing architecture. It’s the cross roads of a left wing housing initiative, and a right wing refusal to spend money on the public good. What you get is something akin to unsecured prison architecture.
So, again, no. This isn’t an example of left-wing architecture. This makes it an example of bad politics.
Soviet right wing refused to spend money on the public good when building millions of buildings across the country? What in the hell are you talking about?
I already gave a lesson in architectural styles. I don’t feel particularly obligated to educate you in Soviet history, nor to engage in a debate on the subject.
Indeed, it was already quite clear that you have no idea what you’re speaking of.
Love me some brutalism.
I would say “socialist modernism”, not " soviet brutalism". Because there are a lot of examples not from ex USSR.
This is Belgrade, Serbia (ex-Yugoslavia):
Museum of Modern Arts:
Hotel “Yugoslavija”:
You should check the link I posted. Honolulu has a crapton of brutalism, so I wouldn’t associate it necessarily with any political movement.
I think where brutalism exists now is more a function of when an area was being developed, and it just happens that those areas underwent substantial development while brutalism was en vogue (late 50’s - late 1970s).
Honolulu has a bunch of brutalism, along with a bunch of other architectural movements
https://thinktechhawaii.com/more-tropical-brutalism-humane-architecture/
I had to screen grab it, but there is actually a brutalist bhudist temple in Chinatown in Honolulu
was the primary architectural style featured in the Soviet Union from the 1950s to the 1980s.
It wasn’t so much a “style” as what happens when you can only afford to build projects in rubles.
It actually started in France in the 1940s
Leftwing architecture is mixed-use, walkable neighbourhoods and community centers built with artistry in mind. It’s beatiful decor to old buildings that feel lived in. It’s parks and bus stops and bike lanes.
Rightwing architecture is a functionally dead grass lawn and a house so perfect that it feels not only dead, but oppressive. It’s replacing a slightly ugly group of three or four stores with a chain restaurant and a parking that generates less tax revenue for the city than the “shitty” stores did. It’s the old, dilapidated neighbourhood that’s falling apart because the city is too busy spending everyone’s tax money subsidizing the rich neighbourhood, then taking photos of only it and claiming that it’s better. No sidewalks, no nature, no way to get around without a car and nothing to do once you have one except a 45min commute in traffic to get to work.
