8 ms·
As I recall the concern was related to limiting the number of automobile trips residents could take outside of their designated zones. The article did not attem
by aww_dang 4y ago
As I recall the concern was related to limiting the number of automobile trips residents could take outside of their designated zones. The article did not attempt to address these concerns. Instead they heaped derision on "conspiracy theorists".
I did a quick google search for supporting articles. Unsurprisingly, I was bombarded with "debunk" articles similar in tone. The top result was the WEF. Here's a citation from an aligned write-up:
>They’re right that the traffic cameras will restrict their freedom to drive around town.
https://slate.com/business/2023/02/15-minute-city-oxford-conspiracy-theory-cars-lockdown-explained.html#:~:text=They%E2%80%99re%20right%20that%20the%20traffic%20cameras%20will%20restrict%20their%20freedom%20to%20drive%20around%20town https://slate.com/business/2023/02/15-minute-city-oxford-con....
If people wish to live in dense urban communities, they can do so voluntarily. There's nothing wrong with individuals making these value judgments and finding the communities on a voluntary basis. The concerns are related to the use of coercion. The article talks past these concerns.
Finally, the narrative of "climate lockdowns" has been advanced by the same voices. As have personal carbon credits connected to a social credit score and a central bank digital currency. Perhaps partisans paint these concerns as unhinged extremism because they have no way to legitimately address these concerns.
Say what you will of the so called "extremist conspiracy theorists" here, but I wouldn't paint them as the authoritarians in this context. The dangers of these authoritarian policies should be plain to see. Attempting to talk past the concerns and malign them as nuttery feels dishonest.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12501 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12501
>Does more media censorship imply more regime stability? We argue that censorship may cause mass disapproval for censoring regimes. In particular, we expect that censorship backfires when citizens can falsify media content through alternative sources of information. We empirically test our theoretical argument in an autocratic regime—the German Democratic Republic (GDR).
- leereeves 4y agoThank you for posting that Slate article. In it, I found a link to a government report about the plan in Oxfordshire[1], which says: "When [the traffic filters] are operating, private cars will not be allowed through the filters without a permit."[1] "Residents ... will be able to apply for a permit to drive through the traffic filters for up to 100 days per year"[1] So this "conspiracy theory" is in fact literally true, the planners admit it, and these articles are lying. https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sites/default/files/file/roads-and-transport-connecting-oxfordshire/Strategic_Assessment_traffic_filter.pdf https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sites/default/files/file/road...
- morelisp 4y agoIt is an ordinary and hitherto uncontroversial task of city planners to close roads and redirect traffic on varying schedules.
- leereeves 4y agoHitherto uncontroversial? There's lots of controversy about even ordinary road closures. And the authors admit that this is a radical solution: "more radical solutions are needed to transform transport in Oxfordshire."
- aww_dang 4y agoI'm not sure that the journalist in question believes that they are actively lying. However, it is possible. More probably, they are cloistered within an ideological bubble where their spin on events is consistent with their worldview. Sprinkle in some partisan hyperbole and it all adds up. Perhaps they might concede there are a few minor exaggerations, but I suspect in the author's view it doesn't amount to lying.
- pja 4y agoThe “conspiracy theory” is that people are going to be constrained to a 15-minute region in order to control them. In fact, if you live in one of these parts of Oxford you will be able to drive to and from where-ever you like: The only new constraint is that some routes that go through Oxford itself will be blocked - you’re still free to drive via the ring road around Oxford & get to your destination that way if you want to. “City blocks road to through traffic” is not usually headline news. There’s something about this story that seems to trigger the conspiracy theorist mindset for some reason.
- aww_dang 4y ago>if you live in one of these parts of Oxford you will be able to drive to and from where-ever you like... From what I've read you have to apply for a 100 day permit to leave your designated zone. You can only drive 100 days per year if your permit is approved. I can understand why people would object to this usurpation. Not sure why these concerns need to be maligned?
- xputer 4y agoSure a 15 minute city means there will be some areas you won't be able to drive to anymore. So what? You'd be able to walk to them in <15 min. Nobody is going to stop people from driving out of town to go camping.
- aww_dang 4y agoPersonally I prefer cycling and have no issue carrying around groceries or other bulky items. I'd even go further than 15 minutes. However, I'm not sure that this is the right choice for everyone. I'm happy to share the road with automobiles and I enjoy my time on the bicycle. From a good faith perspective, I'm not sure why it has to be a divisive either/or. The bigger issue in my view is the compulsory nature of the program and how it plays into a larger, more concerning agenda. It isn't unreasonable to view this as trial balloon for the well documented agenda advanced by the WEF.