No talking on the quiet carriage. No boom box on the subway. No conversation in the queue.
Is this capitalist isolation or is this western “decorum” or what? Why do I have to shake off the instinct to cringe when I hear someone playing music through their phone speakers? Why do I worry if anyone can hear my music through my headphones? What the fuck is this pathetic silence masquerading as a “culture”
This thread took a turn for the worse it seems, I think OP might not have phrased his idea/question the best way possible.
But still I believe it is a valid question to raise if capitalist culture and society has conditioned us in ways that make us generally averse to interaction with strangers and how/if that would differ in a socialist society.
Edit: I think I've got something that fits the topic about how this differed in the GDR for example. Here is a chapter from the book "Stasi State or Socialist Paradise?":
Social ethos – the community spirit
spoiler
In our own society, which is dominated by a free-market ideology, we have seen a breakdown of communities, of solidarity and mutual care, particularly since Thatcher announced that ‘there is no such thing as society’, and set about proving it, individuals became more self-centred. Our society is now ridden with fears – of crime, unemployment, homelessness and isolation.
The social ethos in the GDR and the fact that everyone felt responsible in some way for what happened around them, meant that serious crime and anti-social behaviour were minimal. In general, people had no fears of being out on the streets late at night or entering particular areas of a city; women, too, were not subjected to the levels of sexual harassment they often endure in capitalist countries. Not that such things did not happen, they did, but were exceptions. The absence of mass advertising and sex misused as a sales tool meant that women were not objectified as in the West and this helped mitigate psychological pressures on individuals.
Children were generally seen as everyone’s responsibility. Typically, you could see a row of prams in front of a shop or department store with sleeping babies. if one of them woke up while their mothers or fathers were inside shopping, passers-by would often interact with the child, trying to calm it down if it was distressed, until the parents returned. Fully qualified staff in schools and nurseries ensured children were well cared for and educationally stimulated. Neighbours, too, took an interest in and were concerned about children’s wellbeing. There were thus very few cases of abuse, abandonment, delinquency or serious mental health problems as a result of lack of care.
It is that sense of community that was very strong in the GDR. People did not just live alongside each other, they interacted with each other. Germans (East and West) tend to live in blocks of flats more than in individual houses. In the GDR, the majority of flats belonged to the communities and some were owned by co-operatives. The social mix in these blocks of flats was very different from anything one would find in the UK or in the new Germany. There were academics living next to craftsmen, teachers next to train drivers, civil servants next to shop assistants. This is also the reason why living in a flat was not seen as a ‘second choice’ - they were the typical mode of accommodation and everybody was keen to make their block and the surroundings as pleasant as possible.
Tenants themselves were responsible for the cleaning of the communal areas: the corridors, staircases, airing and washing rooms in the cellar and other communal areas. Where applicable, tenants also took responsibility for caring for the surrounding outside areas which could include lawns, shrubbery and flowerbeds. In winter, they were responsible for clearing snow from the pavement fronting their blocks. Tenants shared this work and took turns on a rota basis. In order to organise the rotas and manage the sums paid by the local authority for the carrying out of this necessary communal work, so-called ‘Hausgemeinschaften’ (residents’ associations in each block of flats) were formed. These associations varied in size depending on the number of flats. Some associations were very active and organised group visits to the theatre or held parties; others just did the minimum. It very much depended on the people living in the block; there was no outside pressure. The money received for looking after the public areas of the flats was held in a common fund. This fund was also supplemented by monies received from recycling.
Recycling was a big thing in the GDR. Already in the 1950s, there was regular recycling of bottles, jars and paper. Back then it was not so much for environmental reasons but because of a scarcity of raw materials and therefore there was an urgent need to make the best use of the available material. However the habit of recycling stuck, and later, when public concerns about the environment became more central, the number of items that could be recycled was expanded. For instance, plastic and batteries were already being recycled in the 1980s. Recycling was easy in the GDR because there were many small, local recycling stations within walking distance – and people were reimbursed for items recycled. For both these reasons it worked well. Everybody recycled, including children who were encouraged in school and by the Young Pioneers organisation. While some collected bottles and paper to earn extra money for themselves, others did it in order to raise money for a particular project. Women and pensioner organisations were involved, as were allotment associations. While these had special recycling campaigns, tenant associations were the key for regular recycling. Many collected all items to be recycled in a special room in the basement of their block of flats and then organised appropriate transport to the nearest recycling station. Some even had contracts with factories and delivered bottles to them directly for re-use.
The residents’ association in a block of flats decided how to use the money that had been built up in their fund over the year. Some created a hobby room with DIY tools, some a special storage space for bicycles or even a party room that could be used by all tenants; some organised parties specially for children or for all the tenants; other associations paid out to every tenant a percentage of the money at the end of the year. How the money was used was democratically decided in the association. This carrying out of community work together and holding parties helped tenants get to know each other really well, and this also encouraged mutual support when it was needed.