Post #1267376
2026-01-24 17:36 UTC
Replies (4)
-
@ObviouslyNotBanana@piefed.world 2026-01-24 17:56
In my country this type of building came about in a society where many still lived in wood sheds without electricity or running water. Where people shared outhouses with their neighbors in the yard of actual residential buildings. Where every residence on average was overpopulated. The architecture of the time homed huge amounts of people with running water, indoor toilets and electricity. Indoor heat without needing a fire. The areas where they were erected weren’t much to look at before. The buildings today may be unappreciated but I find them lovely in a way. They’re a shadow of a society that cared for it’s citizens.
-
@AlexLost@lemmy.world 2026-01-24 19:07
It was built cheap and efficiently, not to please the eye. It could certainly be better, and we know that our environ plays a bigger role in our outlooks than we did before. If they built it today, it would have a few more trees and green spaces but would maintain it’s very essence, which is a large domicile to house people for cheap.
-
@14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 2026-01-25 12:12
where nobody wants to live because it’s ugly and depressing and guaranteed, the poor end up having to live there, and with that comes crime and what not and you end up with ghetto style areas where even police is uneasy you should not give lectures about something you know from bad tv show at best. what a suprise, these communities look according to how you maintain them and people who live there are happy to have a place to live. and when it undergoes revitalization, it looks quite nice. the photo in the post is typical manipulation, everything looks grayish if you capture it in the middle of the winter with bad sky and trees without leaves.
-
@Riverside@reddthat.com 2026-01-26 08:51
because it’s ugly and depressing Speak for yourself, this is much more beautiful and less depressing to me than cookie-mold single-family sprawling housing in the US. You’re just cherrypicking a bad picture in winter with dead trees. the poor end up having to live there and with that comes crime and what not and you end up with ghetto style areas This did NOT happen in the eastern block. Housing was guaranteed but so was work. Crime is mostly a consequence of lack of job prospects enforced on marginalized people, and when you give everyone an education and a fair chance, the vast majority of people gladly accept that. There were no “criminal ghettos” in the Eastern Block. You’re just applying the capitalist logic to countries that weren’t capitalist. When you don’t segregate people by wealth (rich vs poor neighborhood) you eliminate the possibility for ghettos to exist.