Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/lemmyshitpost/p/1009873/left-wing-architecture
One could probably replace the picture with one that captures American suburb. About as soulless and much less efficient in terms of housing. Take the picture in early spring or late autumn to make it extra depressing.
Take picture of the area above during a busy summer from street level and it might actually look cozy in a weir way.
Right-wing architecture?
grass is too green, also the picture doesn't convey the smog, the sweltering heat, and the extinction of animal life
There's an article with interesting pictures here: https://mcmansionhell.com/post/154653904191/a-pictorial-history-of-suburbia
But more than that: every country has ugly places like this. You just rarely see pictures of it. And I bet, in terms of squalor, the pic on this post is much better than some US places.
Also, the term "left-wing architecture" is completely nonsensical.
Ah yes, the famous leftist woke hive mind 15 minute walkable city architecture.
To contrast with some nice car centric infrastructure.
Look, as a someone who floats somewhere between anarchist and social democrat (the closest tags that fits my ideals) I've got nothing against social housing and I'm massively in favour of projects built when balancing good design with modularity/prefab to keep construction costs and time low. Owning a single home is an aspirational luxury that needs to be achievable for individuals BUT it should not be necessary for a good life and providing a warm roof over people's heads gives a solid foundation to fix literally every other problem they have. IMO those solutions need to be community based and the systems at work as small as possible to get the outcome required.
But no, these weren't built to solve homelessness, they were built on mass to shift workers from rural to cities for rapid industrialisation and/or rebuild previously lost housing as a result of mass civilian bombing during WW2.
They didn't fix homelessness in soviet states they stopped recording the homeless statistics and arrested people who were to be shipped off somewhere to be a worker there.
In capitalistic societies most of the time what you need to rent a place is some money for a deposit, the 1st month's rent, and either proof of future income like a job acceptance letter OR enough money to cover the rent whilst you find a job. It's incredibly cutthroat, especially when you don't have regulations or have weakly enforcement of them, but it's usually a fairly quick process that takes a couple of months.
Also under the soviet system you had different problems with being able to move. All the buildings and apartments are government owned and with large government organisations you'll have, by necessity for the large system to work, a lot bureaucracy to navigate. This means a long waiting list, many years or even more than a decade. On top of this you had to have proof of having a job where you're looking to move to because those government apartments are for workers and you haven't been accepted to work there yet so back of the queue you go, but you can't get taken on as a worker there because you don't live there: a sort-of catch 22.
So what's the solution? You'll have to find a private landlord to rent from in the meantime OR wait for a long while for the bureaucracy to finally get around to you.
Are these buildings better than literally being homeless? Yes.
Were they built to specifically solve the issue of homelessness? No.
And as ever no matter what system you run your society under there's going to be issues that will require hard work to resolve and even then it's a trade-off for the inherent flaws in the systems that aren't fixable because they form key parts of the system.
Dude that is such a lie though. They did fix homelessness.
Post-Soviet countries all still have the highest rates of homeownership in the world. That doesn’t happen with “fake statistics”.
They didn’t arrest you if you were homeless or unemployed. They found you a job.
They arrested you if you refused to work, yes. And that happened mostly around WW2, for obvious reasons. Similar things happened in the UK, Germany, France etc etc etc.
Also most people who used to live in the USSR say it took people months to find a house, not years. It was very bureaucratic yes, but not infinitely more than any large nation. Their main issue was ossification of the government.
And you definitely didn’t need a job to get a house. The USSR sponsored dozens of thousands of students from the third and second world to study in the USSR, with free housing, education, food etc etc.
People were heavily incentivized to study for as long as possible. Aka, not work.
Like bro the apartments were built to house people. How is “ending homelessness” not a part of that?
This view is ridiculous, that the USSR only ever did things for the people because they were secretly evil and actually just wanted to exploit people even harder than the capitalist countries that didn’t do anything for their people.
“Communists could never actually want to help people, they are shifty evil people full of guile!”
Like you say they built the apartments to house workers? Why did they invest so heavily in industry? How did that personally benefit the people in charge? Couldn’t it be that having productive industry is the most major part of having a prosperous society, which allows people to have good fulfilling lives?
Yeah, well said. It’s really unfortunate that these were built not to solve homelessness
Saying all that to essentially arrive at
"Were these built to house people? Yes. But were these built to house people? No."
is very reminiscent of Beetlejuice of the Howard Stern Show.
I mean you're probably right I guess, the Soviets probably built these houses nefariously or whatever, but still it's a funny conclusion to have.
Oh yeah “we’re evil so we’re gonna house people… to exploit them even harder than the capitalist countries who let their people rot on the streets!”
this or similar photo is returning like a boomerang every 3 months and every time the poster thinks they just discovered a wheel... it is funny.
I see this image posted multiple times a day at this point
The meme would be funnier if the photo was not containing Soviet Tower Blocks. It's your other left Yuri.
Criticises infrastructure aesthetics in winter
Those blocks don't look great in summer either. It's the brownish grey paint which was very common at one point and which makes any and all buildings look depressing, regardless of age, size or architectural style. It's an easy fix though, just repaint them.
Those blocks don’t look great in summer either.
depends on your definition of great, but they look lot better than in winter when they are full of green. of course you have to take care of them, but lack of maintenance is not the problem of the architecture.
Look, I wasn't appealing to aesthetics, I was calling out how ridiculous it is to say needed housing is bad, because it looks bad.
Cancer?
Baldness?
Puns!
living in the streets in modern capitalism in tents (basically ever major us city). all while others have so much money, that they can pay governments to do their bidding.