I had lived
in a communist city for 20 years and it is no walk in the park, but Giancarlo
de Carlo wrote about a view of a communist city which sounds eerily similar to
the 15-minute cities of today proposed by globalist modern planners to
transform our cities into self-contained prisons from which one can only escape
via public transit. Residents cannot have a private vehicle and there are no
public garages. Living space is dictated per person and the city itself is
limited to a certain number of residents, all clustered within walking distance
of where they work, play, shop, go to school, or entertain.
Supporters
of the C40 Cities Initiative are the Open Society Foundations, Uber,
FedEx, Google, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the UK Government, and the European
Union. World Bank is a designated Partner.
The
15-minute city plan for Los Angeles is called the Livable Communities
Initiative (LCI), “a plan to address LA’s housing, traffic and climate crisis
by building 3-5 stories of gentle density above small retail along
carefully chosen commercial streets that are transformed to be walkable,
bikeable, and livable.” It is unclear what “gentle density” means and who makes
these decisions, but it is not hard to speculate. It is also interesting to
imagine how older people would bike and walk where they need to go. As Democrat
communists have repeated, “never let a crisis go to waste,” and the scorched
earth crisis in LA is the perfect opportunity to remake the city in the
globalist vision promised by Biden to “build back better.” https://www.livablecommunitiesinitiative.com/
The livable
communities website describes Mobility as “Creating a walkable,
bikeable life where everyone can safely and pleasantly walk, bike, trike, use a
golf cart, and access great transit, allows for housing without parking – a key
tool in creating abundance of homes that are affordable to workers and moderate
to low income households.”
An Urbanate
will have all facilities needed for a prison-like community, i.e., schools,
hospitals, shopping malls, waste management, recycling, sports centers, and
public green areas. It is presented as a resort type where residents will have
the highest standard of living possible. https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/2198520
Because
cities have been built by poor planning, the technate wants to erase
them and build urbanates from a clean slate. Why bother to solve
problems in the existing cities? The future of urban
consumption in a 1.5°C world
Klaus Schwab
of the WEF said at the World Government Summit in Dubai in 2015 that Los
Angeles will be “Private Car-Driven-Free by 2030, transforming highways into
parks and other public spheres.” Klaus Schwab: Los Angeles to Be "Private
Car-Driven-Free" by 2030
The proposed
15-minute cities within the technocrats’ Urbanates appear eerily like the Ideal
Communist City written about in 1968. This communist design concept is a
world-wide urbanization called the New Unit of Settlement, built upon
the “rich heritage left by Soviet architecture and urbanism in the 1920s.” The
goal was to create the city of the future, “the material substructure of
communist society.”
Having lived
under communism for 20 years, I am familiar with the grey concrete apartments clustered
around a shopping center that seldom had any food available and when it did,
the lines were endless. These high-rise apartments were like prisons with
reinforced concrete and 650 square feet of space for a family of three, about
the size of an American hotel room.
The Ideal
Communist City required “massive territorial-industrial complexes and the
regrouping of vast populations at selected geographical points.”
To make
an ideal communist city, architects proposed the distribution and re-ordering
of the total population, i.e., “sizes of groups to be housed in communist
society, limits on size of residential areas, distances between such areas,
dynamics and discontinuity of the urbanization process.”
The need of
each human being for food, clothing, and shelter was to be determined by
planners, and the population’s movements to shape and control social processes.
(pp. 15-17) Interior furnishings and exterior architecture and colors had to be
determined by planners.
Now I
understand why suddenly all the fast-food restaurants across the U.S. have
remodeled their happy and colorful exteriors and interior furniture into
various shades of grey, black, and beige, without the previously large windows,
happy interior furniture, and play areas for children. They must have had a
joint conference of Bauhaus utilitarian architecture to discourage humans from
lingering inside and socializing.
Communist
architects recommended the “intensive use of space in modern [high rise]
buildings.” The residential complex will have lower-rise buildings for
overnight nurseries and elementary schools, and high-rise structures for
residential units for adults.”
The
communist planners suggested that children be separated from their parents at
some point while they were tended to by scientifically trained educators
because “mere experience of life and paternal or maternal sentiments are not
enough to equip a person to teach correctly a member of society.” (p. 56)
The children
were to be housed in low-rise buildings away from their parents. “It is said
that a socialized system of education is inhumane toward parents, for it takes
their children away and does not give them a chance to see them and participate
in their education.” (p. 56)
The ideal
communist city with such residential hubs would not allot more than 225 square
feet per person and 50-75 square feet for a small child’s play and sleep. (p.
66)
“The spatial
isolation of apartments in high-rise residential blocks allows the
concentration of a very large number of people in a relatively small space and
the creation of an efficient system of services.” (pp. 69-70)
The three
basic apartment prototypes suggested were for single individuals, for couples,
and for two couples (a generation of older people and a younger couple with
children). (p. 71)
The architects
of this ideal communist city call their residential hubs/prisons, new unit
of settlement (NUS). Each NUS sector, with a radius of 1.2 miles, was
planned for 100,000 residents and many regions with NUS settlements. It sounds
like a controlled ghetto. The architects of 1968 called such zones “rationally
planned areas.”
They
proposed that NUS will relate to other new units of settlement via a system of
rapid transportation, unifying the whole urbanized region. The architects proposed
the “distribution of the labor force with equal efficiency over the whole
region and regulate the immigration of people into an urbanized region in
addition to its normal population expansion by settling other persons in new
units of settlement (NUS).” The entire population would be distributed across the
ghettos called NUS. The “ideal communist city” had a rigidly set population size
for each NUS. (p. 114)
The new
units of settlement were planned on a pedestrian scale, elimination of danger
from vehicular traffic, and green belts, all on 200 acres. Each high-rise was
densely populated. Consumer services were provided for 25,000 people at a time.
(p. 118-119)
The logic of
this kind of change from cities to “smart cities,” “ideal cities,” “15-minute
cities,” “urbanates,” or whatever the government decides to call it, is
standardization, multiform construction, total population and mobility control,
uniformity (Bauhaus ugly), and rewilding of land no longer allowed to human trespassing.
The excuse is that we must save the planet from human destruction, an idea
heavily promoted by the profitable climate change industry.
“Technically
perfect high-rise buildings are seen as the ascetic spirit.” (p. 159) Having
lived in such communist high-rise concrete buildings (5-9 stories apartment
complexes), I can assure you that our spirit was not just ascetic, it was
depressed, oppressed, and devoid of humanity and compassion for fellow residents
who lived in the same state of hunger,
lack of freedom, mobility, and government tyranny.
Read the
file about SmartLA 2028, published in December 2020. You will find many
similarities. https://ita.lacity.gov/sites/g/files/wph1626/files/2021-05/SmartLA2028%20-%20Smart%20City%20Strategy.pdf?trk=public_post_comment-text
The SmartLA
2028 blueprint displays a map of Pacific Palisades, Santa Monica, and
Hollywood areas, now seriously fire damaged. What a coincidence!
No comments:
Post a Comment