When capitalism collapses what are we going to do with all these giant fucking buildings made to house porky and his...

When capitalism collapses what are we going to do with all these giant fucking buildings made to house porky and his wage serfs?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Babylon_(Constant_Nieuwenhuys)
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4356676/China-builds-mega-city-larger-Great-Britain.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fused_grid
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Expropriation, of course

smash em

What but what could we use all that room for?

It seems uniquely designed for wage labour.

Apartments for city workers, museums, storage, hydrofarming. Or tear them down if they take too much upkeep.

demolish them as they look hideous

By the way, they build these skyscrapers in Dubai using literal slaves from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Knowing that, I couldn't even stand living in one.

Right? Porky defeners love to hate on Modernist architecture and it's derivative styles, but heap love onto retarded novelty postmodern garbage. Fucking wipe these things off the face of the earth pls.

Keep in mind tho all the people in slums, living in unsafe conditions. The skyscrapers could be seized and renovated into clean living spaces for the poor

Or we could build safe, comfortable houses that don't look like gigantic dildos.

I like the idea of farming, housing or museums but frankly they should be razed to the ground. Glass and steel shit is always hideous.

Lets build entirely new buildings instead of using these pre existing ones. Yea great idea, great use of resources in an area (the city) where space is already limited

But they're a fucking eyesore and monument to porkydom.

In the long term, sure. In the short term? No.
It's there, use it.

Well then slap some hammer and sickles on them and let them become a monument of the people's triumph over capitalism

idk, but more vertical forests I hope. Abolishing the divide between town and country is just as important as abolishing the division of labor when it comes to building true Communism imo.
yes, I misspelled vertical in the filenames, w/e

We Babylon now.

New Babylon
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Babylon_(Constant_Nieuwenhuys)

The more I learn about the Situationist International the more I love them. They were so fucking based.

Looks amazing. Do we have the technology yet?

We had the technology thousands of years ago.

Also that weird bendy looking building on the left of the OP pic has a little park built into the roof.

Why bring trees into the urban area? Why not take concrete into the rural?

For the fresh eco-socialist aesthetics.

Because trees are cool and concrete sucks.

Cities already have plenty of pigeons and birdshit.

We do. It just takes energy to pump water up, carry nutrients, etc.

Like this user said we could have already build most modern cities like this if urban planners were more ecologically minded. Aside from that, China is actually building tons of vertical forests like this as a measure against pollution and smog.

Living space for the workers of course.
Or maybe find something useful to do with a building where you can have a lot of people as possible.
I mean Stalin did something similar.

I actually do think we should do that. I actually think Mao's backyard furnaces were a good idea in their own time, something like Fourier's phalansteries are a good model for how communes and intentional communities can be constructed.

I actually unironically really love a lot of architecture from the Stalinist era.

How to make urban planners more ecologically minded, in your opinion?

Fucking hell, why is that it's always the government that even remotely cares about parks and bringing more nature into urban environment? I almost never see any private entities giving a shit about that, probably something about "increasing maintenance cost on muh property".

Because why in the fuck would a private entity build something that people can use for free, produces no monetary value and takes up space that could be otherwise used more profitably?

At best it would just be plastered in ads, which ruins the park anyway. All the more proof why markets are cancer.

If poor people want access to green areas they should work harder until they can afford to live in luxe apartments with private gardens.

Why even live?

Uhhh because capitalism.

More parks, more public transport, more wide open public spaces, lower concentration of population density into tiny niches, more renewable energy is obviously a given, really most of the stuff garden variety environmentalists talk about. Bookchin probably put the most thought into what it would look like and how it could be implemented out of any Leftist in human history.


I mean that is what Communism would look like. I think it would be ridiculously naive to claim either of us would see this in our own life times user, but it's the only thing worth fighting for, I think.

When they do, it's a limited access private area.

Capitalism won't die. 90% of humans will.

i think u mean if

Re-purpose for the benefit of society. Whether that would be for housing, storage, etc.

Capitalism's collapse is an inevitability - it just might not be us causing it, it might destroy itself and the rest of humanity along with it instead.

Expropriate them, renovate them, and turn them into flats for working people.

There is absolutely zero chance of capitalism existing forever.

LONDON HAS THE MOST HORRIBLE SKYLINE IN THE WORLD


KILL YOURSELVES BRITFAGS

Yes. And automated high-tech factories, libraries, entertainment places, schools, community spaces…

The design of modern open plan buildings means you can basically turn them into anything without having to damage the highly expensive structure.


I agree its important to have vegetation in cities but this is just retarded. Have you any idea of the material costs of the additional weight of earth and water (and long term maintenance) to have intensive green areas on buildings, when you can have perfectly useful parks on ground level at no additional cost?

Balconies and the occasional extensive green roof are fine, but these fantasies will never happen because of simple material conditions.

This is true, we do need a replanning of densities and uses, and the introduction of urban farming and just leisure nature. Not just for humans but also to restore and reconnect habitats for other species we've displaced.


So what, you'll demolish them and waste all that extremely expensive infrastructure and make all that hard labor be entirely in vain?


Are you mad? Urban planners today are some of the most ecologically minded people. They just can't do anything because of porky government and private interests. Architecture schools have a lot of lefty potential that's sadly left almost entirely to porky and the spectacle. You literally cannot study the history of the city and not realize that most of its modern flaws are the result of rampant capitalism and that they can't be solved unless capitalism is eliminated. E.g. gentrification, slums, endless unsustainable growth, pollution, destruction of history…

I hate these architecture/urbanism "discussions" on the internet, its like libtards or polyps trying to talk about socialism, the average person is just absolutely ignorant but still spergs out their literally 19th century tier uninformed opinions.

The gurkin looks like shit I'll give you that but the rest look ok. The tall middle one is even kinda pretty, sorta sci fi esq. That taken into consideration they could be offices for the new socialist government to work in to organise the new society or just be re-purposed as housing. No need to rip 'em down, least not for a while

Turn them into womens' shelters, community art galleries, vertical farms, etc.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4356676/China-builds-mega-city-larger-Great-Britain.html

I think the situation is much more nuanced than you think.

Yes, these buildings are made for labour, but the labour is not very useful. Under socialism, we would not need most:
- Call centres
- Finance jobs
- Law jobs (lawyers may still exist, but specifics like business lawyers, IP protection etc. would not)
- Etc. Basically, all the 'meta-capitalism' jobs that do not actually create value, but help keep the flow of capital going would be abolished.

I can't think of a valuable source of labour that could be produced inside these buildings. Perhaps they could be used for housing, but they are unnecessary and we already have enough buildings for housing.


I believe that they will be a relic of the past, and slowly demolished. They do not produce much value and are impractical for living.

fuck off saruman

Epic parties!

BASE jumping platforms.

CENTRAL PLANNING BUREAU

Where do the roots go?

In the late 90s or early aughts I read something about plans for a modern bank building (in either Frankfurt or Berlin I believe) having some trees inside, several floors above the ground. I'm not sure whether they went through with it, as doing that turned out to be very heavy and expensive. I don't like the pictures you show, as I strongly suspect no engineering knowledge went into making them.


I loathe that absurd metaphor.
I don't understand that. The circle shows bird-distance, not human walking distance. Why is the smallest level not a regular grid, is catering to swastika-lovers really that important?

You ever look at docos on north korea and realize there are no billboards or advertisements and its like the norks have irl adblock

Like if you ever throw the old guard, you have to have big plans to change society, art, culture,fashion everything.

This is what hitler wanted germany to look like.

art galleries

Homeless shelters.

Aeroponics. You could feed whole city blocks with one of those towers, and with aeroponics there's no need to lug several hundred tons of dirt up there, and there's already plumbing.

Except for Grorious Reader ads, of course.

This sounds sort of overly vindictive and wasteful but It'd be neat to relocate populations away from Porky's major cities and let them rot.
Use them as examples of what capitalism creates, in juxtaposition with what communally focused, centrally planned cities can be.
Fuck, put plaques on the skyscrapers and call them tombstones.

Destroy them. The glass pillars of capitalism are a menace to our cities.

These buildings go pretty quickly without maintenance. Trust me. They take care of themselves.

say what you like about the tenets of Not Socialism they had a great sense of aesthetics

Hitler had shit taste in aesthetic. That shit looks like what americans think european cities look like. Too widely spaced, too much futurism, lots of room for inhuman death contraptions known as cars, very unfriendly towards people, buildings that are too large for humans and look weird and fake.

they would make the dankest community centers in the world

every group could have their own space

You guys don't think very hard about what "when capitalism collapses" looks like, do you? It's not like the end of fight club.

If we abolish large multinationals theres not going to be a lot of need for prestigious glass spikes in high-value plots of land.

Well, nobody ever doubts Nazi aesthetics. Best dressed fuckers of all time, no doubt. Although I can't help but think we could have reasoned with him had he lived, he always seemed so close to being a comrade, for example "A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true socialism is not. Marxism places no value on the individual, or individual effort, or efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. -Adolf Hitler"

Apart from all the enslaving, genocide, killing of communists, anarchists, socialists, social democrats, gays, handicapped, political opponents, other "races", their own race that spoke the wrong language and declaring Bolshevism the ultimate ideological enemy?

I cringe every time I hear that fucking quote from Hitler. He doesn't know shit about real socialism, he's just appropriating the term to make his brand of horrendous fascism look nicer to the drooling, desperate masses he duped into putting him into power with his manipulative words. He never read a page of Marx in his entire life.

And dont forget the fact that the nazis invented privitisation, promoted class collaboration, opposed womens rights and promoted a conflicting message of blind obedience to the fatherland and also individualistic competition due to natural differences.

they are connected to the power grid and water network as well as the main infrastructure of the city

as far as short term i see no reason why they could not be converted to residential spaces

fully automated 3d-printing communism when

Realtalk: vertical farming is gonna be the only feasible way to feed people in the future

Wrong thread fam:

We'll be dead before capitalism ends, but additive manufacturing techniques and automation will definitely make manufacturing and science to every single person in the world in our lifetime. Maybe communism will come by the time we're old, that would be so nice.

Take a page from our anti-imperialist comrades and fly planes into them.

Not all of these 'meta-capitalism' functions are unnecessary. There's no reason we can't put economic analysis and planning committees in these buildings, unless you think they'll be tainted by association.

Yes its a shit metaphor; the proposed system is an integration of transport-oriented development at multiple grid scales with filtered permeability and not really a tree-like all-car system.

Well sure, a diagonal movement will take you a couple of extra minutes and a stroll through a pretty park, don't be a nazi.

That is for multiple reasons:
* It makes it apparent for large motor vehicles that they're not meant to go there, and those that do must slow down. (That's also why the local streets end in T intersections instead of crossing straight through to the next neighborhood).
* Creates an exclusively pedestrian area
* Bends provide noise reduction
* Bends provide visual privacy
* Provides a bit of uniqueness and surprise so that you don't have a tyrannically homogeneous grid.
* It could be made into a "full" grid with exclusively pedestrian passages anyway, though perhaps overkill. I suppose it really depends on the density.

Note that the grid doesn't have to be strictly orthogonal and precise, it can be bent and stretched and curved a bit (and should, to account for terrain); the important thing is to preserve the connectivity and filtering topology.

If you're genuinely interested en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fused_grid

All those things combined discourage driving on the local scale while encouraging walking / cycling, therefore making it calmer, safer, healthier, less polluting, and the streets decongested from unnecessary local vehicle trips thus more efficient for their intended medium-distance trips.