Log in

View Full Version : urbanization,good or bad?



sunfarstar
29th July 2009, 01:03
PLZ tell me.:)

ÑóẊîöʼn
29th July 2009, 01:49
I say good, but I'm biased. :D

But seriously, urban living has more inherent efficiency than rural living. Less waste means more energy and resources for everyone.

sunfarstar
29th July 2009, 02:21
However, China's urbanization process has a lot of problems, which I think is very much like a tragic epic. Many farmers did not work after entering the city, it has degenerated into a slum to, ah very contradictory.

ÑóẊîöʼn
29th July 2009, 02:49
However, China's urbanization process has a lot of problems, which I think is very much like a tragic epic. Many farmers did not work after entering the city, it has degenerated into a slum to, ah very contradictory.

Yes, it is true that urban areas under capitalism can end up as little more than dumping grounds for what was previously the rural poor. This is of course further evidence (as if we needed any more!) that capitalism is inadequate to deal with the challenges that face human society.

pastradamus
29th July 2009, 07:18
Urbanization is an inevitable part of Capitalist Industrialisation and therefore Socialist society.

Comrade Kaile
31st July 2009, 13:26
i like urbanisation, but i have to say its bad simply because the negative effects caused by it i.e. pollution, overcrowding, homelessness etc. etc. are definately not worth the simple convenience of having 46 shopping centres within like 20mins by bus...

although i cant really say id ever see urban or suburban areas ever being relinquished, and i suppose there will eventually be some way to even out the pro/con

genstrike
31st July 2009, 16:09
Urbanization is really a necessity given the population we have, especially if we want to utilize technological advancements in agriculture (not to be technologically deterministic, but it takes much fewer people to work the same land with advanced farm machinery). If we had 6 billion people subsistence farming, we would take up so much space there wouldn't be a single tree left on the planet.

The problem is that third world cities are often a dumping ground for a massive surplus population of people displaced from the countryside by agribusiness, with little industrial base or means to support themselves in the cities. Ergo, we have slums on a massive scale - I recall reading that 99% of Ethiopia's urban population is living in slums. I tried to apply that percentage to my city to imagine what it would be like, and just couldn't.

I'd recommend reading Mike Davis' "Planet of Slums"

Vanguard1917
31st July 2009, 16:39
Revolutionary and radical movements under capitalism have tended to stem from the towns - from among the urban proletariat, which socialists have looked to as their main social constituency, and the young student population. So urbanisation is not only an inevitable feature of economic growth, it is also a progressive occurance from the POV of the potential for the flourishing of progressive politics.

In opposing urbanisation and celebrating rural life, Western environmentalists only reveal their reactionary and petit-bourgeois prejudices - prejudices which no socialist should share.

That's, of course, not to say that we should not recognise, expose and criticise the contradictory nature of urbanisation of under capitalism, the poverty and hardship that it can spread. However, that ought not for a single moment to be the same as implying that rural life is somehow better. It's not. Statistically speaking, globally, poverty is far more prevalent in the country than the town.

Psy
1st August 2009, 00:18
Urbanization is good for but that is not to say every settlement should be urbanized. I don't see the point for a socialist world to for example urbanize all of the North West Territories in Canada, best a world socialist society would be able to do with such rural regions is improve their infrastructure (maybe attract tourists).

TheCultofAbeLincoln
2nd August 2009, 18:25
http://www.quickcalleronline.com/images/core/maps/regions/Los_Angeles_region_B.jpg

Killfacer
2nd August 2009, 21:24
It's good but obviously like you say there are hiccups along the way and major problems with povery and unemployment.

Pogue
2nd August 2009, 21:58
i am a ghetto boy so i like cities

fiddlesticks
3rd August 2009, 04:51
Responsible urbanization is good.. in Florida places get filled with dirt and built upon that just don't need to be built upon, causing environmental weirdness. Cities are good because everything is so close and you dont need to travel as far to get places.

SubcomandanteJames
3rd August 2009, 05:06
Urbanization within itself I believe is neutral until it is enacted. That is, it can go either ways, or even be a mix of good and bad, pros and cons.

RainbowLeftist
3rd August 2009, 05:48
Fuck that, I'll go down fighting before you send me to the big city.

I'd much rather live 50mi out in the woods away from folks, than a city over 30,000 peoples.