Any thoughts on this /his/? I wrote this: Redpill on archi

Perhaps architecture needs a broader look at how the building helps humans live? Like more aesthetic reasons? There needs to be unity of design? Maybe there should be themes of city with individualism inside that theme. Because there is a promotion of thematics it helps the mental aspect of being human in a big city?

While he has some points, I can't get over the whole "angry rant" ridiculous approach he has, and how that lunatic believes that postmodern is some kind of secret government program to turn us into submissive slaves.
I don't like a lot of newer architecture just like I don't like postmodernist art. But that guy clearly just watched a couple of documentaries and acts outraged.

Need more comfy midrise, mixed zoning places with no cars.

>>3021930
I agree that's a good point. He's trying to push a single viewpoint through a lot of lenses and he's pretty fanatic about it. At the end he does say it's not meant to be simply railing for traditionalism but against post modernist thought in anything it inhabits.

He's got a good way of connecting the dots in that sense but it does make the analysis of architecture by itself, removing his commentary about post modernism, a little underwhelming. Still I got a lot out of it and it took me a bit to understand exactly what he was railing against but I got it in stages and am happy the conversation has progressed to architecture.

>>3021951
This

>>3021930
>how that lunatic believes that postmodern is some kind of secret government program to turn us into submissive slaves.
It's not secret at all though? Read any architectural theory?

I don't like what post-modernism did to architecture
I don't like buildings being torn down for soulless replacements because of "cost" or other silly reasons
I don't like cities and zoning actively messing with or preventing architecture projects