3 ms·
> First, a thesis: Americans driving cars kill Americans riding bikes for the same reason that Americans in pandemics refuse to wear masks, and Americans who lo
by hirundo 5y ago
> First, a thesis: Americans driving cars kill Americans riding bikes for the same reason that Americans in pandemics refuse to wear masks, and Americans who love assault rifles get panicky at the mention of gun control, and Blue Lives Matter types freak at any suggestion that cops should try to kill fewer Black people.
> Before I elaborate, a word about where I’m coming from: progressive politics, obviously ...
Obviously. And a big turn off to this non-progressive from reading the rest of an article that doesn't have to relate to political valence at all, let alone lead with it.
Outside publishes some truly outstanding writing. Orthogonal political rants don't add to that, even the ones I agree with.
- wpietri 5y agoWhy do you believe America's high death rate for cyclists is totally unrelated to politics? It seems pretty connected to me.
- BitwiseFool 5y agoIf you want to have a discussion about bicyclists and road safety, that's perfectly fine. If you want to pass laws, that's political, of course. But many people - myself included - don't like it when authors drag in disparate references to hot button topics from the national discourse. For example.... >> First, a thesis: Americans driving cars kill Americans riding bikes for the same reason that Americans in pandemics refuse to wear masks, and Americans who love assault rifles get panicky at the mention of gun control, and Blue Lives Matter types freak at any suggestion that cops should try to kill fewer Black people. For an article about that's supposed to advance the cause of bicyclist safety, it's not only inflammatory, it's also outlandish and hurts the credibility of the author.
- wpietri 5y agoI understand some people don't like it. But I'm not asking what you like. I'm asking why you assert it's unrelated to politics.
- BitwiseFool 5y agoI genuinely do not understand what you mean. I agree that changing road safety laws is political - politicians will have to pass legislation - but I still don't see why the author needs to wrap so much of this debate within the framework of progressive politics by making allusions to gun control and police officers killing African Americans.
- wpietri 5y agoWe both agree you don't see it. The question is why you not seeing it proves the two are unrelated ("orthogonal") and therefore shouldn't be mentioned together. From my reading, he clearly makes the case that they are connected through the balance between freedom to endanger others and freedom from endangerment. So to me you seem to be claiming that what "freedom" means in America is entirely unrelated to politics. When as far as I can tell, that question has been central to American politics from 1776 to the present.
- ultrarunner 5y agoOut of curiosity, would you draw a large distinction between using the word "politics" or "culture" to describe the connection? I suspect that what some are describing as "political" may thought of by others as a disconnect and disagreement between cycling culture and driving culture. Solving this disconnect through political force may indeed be one solution, but it is far from the only solution. Just speculation on my part.
- wpietri 5y agoI would because culture is a pretty broad thing. "Driving culture" includes all sorts of things. E.g., road trips, Route 66, long commutes, drive-through restaurants and cupholders. It becomes politics when the needs of different groups conflict. When a group asserts, implicitly or otherwise, "My privilege to get somewhere quickly overrides your right to get somewhere alive," that's just not on the same level as cupholders.
- minikites 5y agoWhat would a good article look like to you if the root cause was in fact political? How would that be different than this one?