calling actual human beings “parasites” (…) will lead to no good outcome
Sure, but please consider a basic principle of anarchism is to seek justice, not revenge. Justice means everyone would have housing, in which case those who used to be landlords would no longer be exploiters. Only maoist-style communists (not anarchists) are promoting genocide as a means of “purification of the masses”
That sounds to me like the “in the end everything will be good” (aka the end justifies the means) logic. Not very in-line with Anarchist tradition :p
But I get what you want to say… it just sounds dangerously close to some other scapegoat rhetoric employed by those very much opposed to the kind of end result you hope for.
But IMHO landlords are just a symptom of larger issues in our society and demonizing them will not solve those at all.
Disclosure: No I am not a landlord, nor do I plan to be one ;) But I am also not renting, so maybe I am a bit less bitter about it these days (and having to deal with building maintenance is not as simple as just handing it off to some craftsmen to do it for you).
Well, they’re part of it. When we’re talking about landlords as a group we’re not talking about someone who own a tiny piece of land. We’re talking about the sharks who own most land. Privatization of public spaces and gentrification are really harmful to communities, and is only possible through blind faith private property rights. So yes, we do have other issues to tackle. But struggling to make ends meet just to afford a place to live is not the best we can do as human societies.
maybe I am a bit less bitter about it these days
I guess this explains that. I get some people are happy about their owner, good for them. But most people are not, they’re being extorted considerable amounts of money (more than half of their salary, usually) just for basic survival.
having to deal with building maintenance is not as simple
Agreed, but that’s in the good cases. In many cases, landowners neglect the house/building not providing essential repairs. The DIY forums and Youtube channels are littered with tenants complaining about their owners not doing anything for mold/isolation (which by law is a responsibility of the owner in most countries) and taking matters into their own hands because that’s the only thing they can do. In the bigger buildings, this can lead to collective rent strikes, because people aren’t happy to pay for a broken service.
A large part of the problem seems to be that people insist on living in really dense urban areas, and suppy & demand drives up rental prices there to insane levels. While in other areas rents can be extremely cheap.
Of course, it is all a question where one can earn a living, but I feel a lot of people are just complaining about their landlords because they want to have a livestyle that is above of what they can actually afford.
people insist on living in really dense urban areas
For most people it’s not even a choice. You’re here because that’s where the jobs are, or because your ancestor’s jobs were and now you’re stuck in a concrete jungle and don’t know the way out, and don’t have a car and a driver’s license and the networks to find cheap housing on the countryside.
suppy & demand drives up rental prices
That’s not how housing works. It’s a huge speculative bubble with millions of estates sitting empty precisely to drive prices up. If a government wanted to defeat homelessness, they could just snap their fingers and everybody would instantly (or at least within the week) have a decent place to live.
they want to have a livestyle that is above of what they can actually afford
Can’t blame people who hate their lives for not enjoying all the privileges/resources the school/television tells them to acquire or they’ve failed their entire life as human beings. Most people would be happy if we learned about cooperation and satisfying human needs, instead of stark competition and misery. Video games, drugs/alcool and vacations, despite being very enjoyable, are no substitute for a fulfilling life.
Moreover, what does “can afford” even mean? Why could some people afford a living and others not? Don’t all constitutions and declarations of human rights or whatever claim that all humans are created free & equal and should enjoy free access to more than basic services? Why then have some people in the western civilized countries no access to housing, water or electricity?
First of all the issues homeless people face are not as simple as “the government is not providing free housing to them”. But that seems a bit besides the point here.
As for the other things you mentioned… take a step back and think about it again. Living in a housing cooperative somewhere in the country-side is basically free. There are already quite a few options like that, and it is not terribly difficult to set one up yourself if you have some friends to do it with you.
Yet the majority of people prefer to chase a capitalist dream in the city… one that under the economic circumstances in Europe is a pipe-dream and basically a form of self-serfdom.
While I am sympathetic to young peoples’ unrealistic dreams, I find it kind of unfair to put the blame only on the landlords. In a sense they are doing them a favour by making it very clear what dreams are realistic and which are not.
Or to take another view: in China they are building huge affordable housing complexes so that millions of young people can move to the big cities and be used as something that might be adequately described as “human fuel” in the factories satisfying the global demand. And there I can even see a bit of a positive side as living conditions in the Chinese countryside are often very miserable and especially for women it can be quite liberating to move to the city. But this kind of devil’s bargin that might somewhat hold up for young people in China up to now, really doesn’t in Europe.
Sure, but please consider a basic principle of anarchism is to seek justice, not revenge. Justice means everyone would have housing, in which case those who used to be landlords would no longer be exploiters. Only maoist-style communists (not anarchists) are promoting genocide as a means of “purification of the masses”
That sounds to me like the “in the end everything will be good” (aka the end justifies the means) logic. Not very in-line with Anarchist tradition :p
But I get what you want to say… it just sounds dangerously close to some other scapegoat rhetoric employed by those very much opposed to the kind of end result you hope for.
But IMHO landlords are just a symptom of larger issues in our society and demonizing them will not solve those at all.
Disclosure: No I am not a landlord, nor do I plan to be one ;) But I am also not renting, so maybe I am a bit less bitter about it these days (and having to deal with building maintenance is not as simple as just handing it off to some craftsmen to do it for you).
Not my line of reasoning :)
Well, they’re part of it. When we’re talking about landlords as a group we’re not talking about someone who own a tiny piece of land. We’re talking about the sharks who own most land. Privatization of public spaces and gentrification are really harmful to communities, and is only possible through blind faith private property rights. So yes, we do have other issues to tackle. But struggling to make ends meet just to afford a place to live is not the best we can do as human societies.
I guess this explains that. I get some people are happy about their owner, good for them. But most people are not, they’re being extorted considerable amounts of money (more than half of their salary, usually) just for basic survival.
Agreed, but that’s in the good cases. In many cases, landowners neglect the house/building not providing essential repairs. The DIY forums and Youtube channels are littered with tenants complaining about their owners not doing anything for mold/isolation (which by law is a responsibility of the owner in most countries) and taking matters into their own hands because that’s the only thing they can do. In the bigger buildings, this can lead to collective rent strikes, because people aren’t happy to pay for a broken service.
A large part of the problem seems to be that people insist on living in really dense urban areas, and suppy & demand drives up rental prices there to insane levels. While in other areas rents can be extremely cheap.
Of course, it is all a question where one can earn a living, but I feel a lot of people are just complaining about their landlords because they want to have a livestyle that is above of what they can actually afford.
For most people it’s not even a choice. You’re here because that’s where the jobs are, or because your ancestor’s jobs were and now you’re stuck in a concrete jungle and don’t know the way out, and don’t have a car and a driver’s license and the networks to find cheap housing on the countryside.
That’s not how housing works. It’s a huge speculative bubble with millions of estates sitting empty precisely to drive prices up. If a government wanted to defeat homelessness, they could just snap their fingers and everybody would instantly (or at least within the week) have a decent place to live.
Can’t blame people who hate their lives for not enjoying all the privileges/resources the school/television tells them to acquire or they’ve failed their entire life as human beings. Most people would be happy if we learned about cooperation and satisfying human needs, instead of stark competition and misery. Video games, drugs/alcool and vacations, despite being very enjoyable, are no substitute for a fulfilling life.
Moreover, what does “can afford” even mean? Why could some people afford a living and others not? Don’t all constitutions and declarations of human rights or whatever claim that all humans are created free & equal and should enjoy free access to more than basic services? Why then have some people in the western civilized countries no access to housing, water or electricity?
First of all the issues homeless people face are not as simple as “the government is not providing free housing to them”. But that seems a bit besides the point here.
As for the other things you mentioned… take a step back and think about it again. Living in a housing cooperative somewhere in the country-side is basically free. There are already quite a few options like that, and it is not terribly difficult to set one up yourself if you have some friends to do it with you.
Yet the majority of people prefer to chase a capitalist dream in the city… one that under the economic circumstances in Europe is a pipe-dream and basically a form of self-serfdom.
While I am sympathetic to young peoples’ unrealistic dreams, I find it kind of unfair to put the blame only on the landlords. In a sense they are doing them a favour by making it very clear what dreams are realistic and which are not.
Or to take another view: in China they are building huge affordable housing complexes so that millions of young people can move to the big cities and be used as something that might be adequately described as “human fuel” in the factories satisfying the global demand. And there I can even see a bit of a positive side as living conditions in the Chinese countryside are often very miserable and especially for women it can be quite liberating to move to the city. But this kind of devil’s bargin that might somewhat hold up for young people in China up to now, really doesn’t in Europe.