can't even have the pleasure of aesthetically pleasing logos and brands anymore, everything's got to be a single word in black and white
can our overlords atleast go back to marketing that doesn't look like ass
Under communism we will consume brands with cool logos. Wait, fick.
This, but unironically. Buncha workers make something in their collectively run factory and want to stamp it with some sort of artwork that they either commission out or do in house? Why not?
The only real problem with branding is that it represents capitalist enterprises. If the brands are by and for the workers I see no problem with having cool labels and mascots and shit.
The USSR had tons of brands with cool logos and artwork
The idea that communism is just like a world where everything is labeled what it is, like in Repo Man, is foolish. Damn foolish.
Also branding, specifically good branding, will be way more prevalent in a socialist/communist society where capitalist monopolies are non-existent. Just look at companies with monopolies in America. They all have terrible, boring, generic looks to them.
If you spend less of your working day generating surplus value for capitalists, you can spend more of it actually improving and taking pride in the products you create. If your work isn't just a means to subsist, you'll naturally be more driven to participate in creative and innovative processes.
i like it. i love those beers that just say "beer." break it down to the lowest amount of commercialism, so when we finally take it over we don't have to change much.
COMMUNISM IS NOT REPO MAN PEOPLE! YOU CAN HAVE COOL BRANDING AND ARTWORK!
People should be proud of the social product they create with their productive labor. They should want to mark that product so other people want to use it. Make things look cool, generic naming and bland art is for capitalist monopolies.
sure, but we'll have to change it all eventually anyway, and using art to market products for shareholders is meh. i'm glad the artist maybe gets their name out (lol not happening) but the idea that commercialization isn't a complete degradation of art is where we disagree.
It's not commercialization in the capitalist sense if it's workers branding a product that they made. The whole problem with capitalist branding is that it's meant to be manipulative and not descriptive and creative.
I think a world where all beer is the same and all food is just called by a generic name is depressing. There's nothing wrong with regionalized production and artwork and branding done by workers in those regions that informs whoever ends up with the product about the people who made it and their culture.
yeah i agree. but i still like seeing "beer" on a can.
maybe i'm just poisoned from hating commercialized art for years and years.
I mean, incorporating some form of "beer" on your (beer) brand is good, again, a brand should be descriptive and in cases like alchohol/beer where a single shop makes multiple different products, each label they put out under their brand should also be descriptive of what the label is in relation to the brand and include some form of creative work that represents the conditions and culture of the creators. Like the way craft/small batch breweries do it is fine and that's what labeling and branding should look like under socialism.
The no name brand?
I do get a chuckle from those sometimes. "Water bottle. For drinking".
Just be like me and file the brands off stuff. I am not being paid to advertize. My shit has my name on it. And I probably repainted dumb as well.
Speaking of logo aesthetics over time cari.institute is a great demonstrations of the progression of those types of things
