After the 1917 October Revolution, Vladimir Tatlin developed the novel idea of integrating artistic creation into the biggerscope of production. This theory was expressed with emphasize on real materials in real space. The display of the Monumentto the Third International in 1920 marked a turning point and constructivism became the USSR’s main stream artistic andarchitecture style. Taking the Monument to the Third International as a reference, architects and artists designed what havebeen deemed as utopian examples of constructivist architecture using theater stages, decorations, posters, and drawings.However, revolutionary architecture was built on the efforts of the architects who reformulated constructivist approach.Anatoli Lunacharsky who was appointed as the head of Narkompros, assigned avant-garde artists to institutions affiliated toNarkompros due to their support for the revolution. Tatlin, who was appointed as the head of the Moscow Fine Arts Departmentin 1919, emphasized that the distinction between plastic arts should disappear and the artist should have an engineer formationin his writings. The fact that Vkhutemas’s education program is immanent to Tatlin’s ideas, and his assignment to designMonument to the Third International within the scope of Lenin’s Monumental Program gave Tatlin a chance to apply his ideas inpractice and provide a basis for the constructivism movement to rise. Design of Monument to the Third International led to theadoption of Tatlin’s ideas by different artists and architects, afterwards First Working Group of Constructivists was formed in1921. Constructivists had declared the tectonic style, factura and construction disciplines in which the theory of constructivistarchitecture is shaped in their programs, in which they refer to historical materialism and scientific socialism.Monument to the Third International, the first monument of machine art, is a living organism where socialist propaganda iscarried out, which overcomes the barrier of time and space due to its technological equipment, and contains spaces wheresocialist culture can be experienced. The monument, where tectonic style, factura and construction disciplines correspond,influenced names such as Alexander Rodchenko, Lyobov Popova, Alexander Vesnin, as well as Gustav Klutsis who completedhis education in Vkhutemas, Naum Gabo who criticized the constructivist theories, El Lissitzky whose work was heavilyinfluenced by Suprematism and Yakov Chernikhov, who designed technically advanced examples of constructivist architectureon the utopia plane. Nevertheless, designs that are impossible to implement created by the constructivists without consideringthe objective conditions of the USSR, the technological possibilities of the period and the needs of the society show that thecontradiction of constructivists’ discourses and architectural practices.In the period between 1922 and 1925, the practice of constructivists was proven to be applicable and the constructivist theorywas reconsidered with a realistic approach. The Vesnin Brothers’ Palace of Labour design, which is essential for thedevelopment of constructivist architecture, is a design where tectonic, factura and construction disciplines correspond, the useof industrial materials is emphasized, reflects the socialist culture with analogy, and most importantly, it can be applied withthe technological possibilities of its age. Just as Monument to the Third International is the cornerstone of the development ofconstructivist architecture on the utopia level, the design of the Palace of Labour, is also a touchstone in the real plane.Another essential development was Ginzburg’s work Style and Epoch that reconsiders the theory of constructivist architectureand puts it on a real plane. Constructivist architecture was introduced to the USSR with the establishment of OSA in 1925under the leadership of Vesnin and Ginzburg. Between 1925 and 1932/1934, the constructivists, who aimed to organize thecollective life in a world where there was no hierarchy, and to convey the achievements of the proletarian culture and socialistorder to the society through architecture, were based on the concept of social condensor. They have succeeded in buildingworkers’ clubs, palaces of culture, commune houses and residential buildings in different regions of the USSR. The aim of this paper is to shed light on the role of constructivist architecture within the greater context of architecturalhistory, the difference and similarities between Utopian architecture and applied designs, and the application of constructivistarchitecture in communal living practices of the USSR. Analyzing the relationship between arts and politics is critical to thisdiscussion. With this aim, the relation of arts-politics-space, created by the disciplines of tectonic unites, faktura, andconstruction, is