3 ms·

Thank 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

Thank 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 ago
It is an ordinary and hitherto uncontroversial task of city planners to close roads and redirect traffic on varying schedules.
- leereeves 4y ago
  Hitherto 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 ago
I'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 ago
The “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?
  - pja 4y ago
    You have completely misunderstood the proposed scheme: The permits allow local residents to drive through the actual restriction points themselves a limited number of times a year. They are not permits to allow people to leave their “designated 15 minute zone” or whatever else the conspiracy theorists have cooked up this time. A resident of Oxford who owns a car can drive anywhere in the country (including around the ring road to a destination in another part of Oxford) 365 days a year. No permit is or will be required beyond those that everyone has to have if they wish to drive a motorised vehicle in the UK.
    - aww_dang 4y ago
      Thanks for the clarification. Not familiar with the exact layout of Oxford. Seems like it would be difficult to leave your neighborhood if you're blocked behind these bollards. Especially on a one way street. The idea that you're still allowed to drive nationally (for now?) seems like a moot point if you cannot leave your street. From what I've read here, this is mostly for high streets and congested areas. The videos I've seen from the "conspiracy theorists" show residents sabotaging blockades in a residential area. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3224t7U7upQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3224t7U7upQ A simpler way to understand it would be an infringement on their freedom of movement. It isn't hard to see why that is objectionable, no matter the scale. Especially when aligned voices are suggesting that private car ownership is a problem. >That is great. Private car use is insanely inefficient, and has numerous negative externalities like toxic gas exhaust, increasing the risk of injury to people not in a car, and rubber particulates. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34967148 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34967148 >Goodbye car ownership, hello clean air: welcome to the future of transport https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/goodbye-car-ownership-hello-clean-air-this-is-the-future-of-transport/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/goodbye-car-ownership... >There have been numerous examples of personal carbon allowance programs in discussions for the last two decades... https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/09/my-carbon-an-approach-for-inclusive-and-sustainable-cities/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/09/my-carbon-an-approach... >Under a “climate lockdown,” governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling. To avoid such a scenario, we must overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently. https://archive.is/imeYL https://archive.is/imeYL The missing context can easily be found in the talking points of those advancing this agenda. You could also consider giving some of the "conspiracy theorists" a good faith listen, instead of pejoratively dismissing them as such.

morelisp 4y ago

It is an ordinary and hitherto uncontroversial task of city planners to close roads and redirect traffic on varying schedules.

leereeves 4y ago
Hitherto 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 ago

I'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 ago

The “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?
- pja 4y ago
  You have completely misunderstood the proposed scheme: The permits allow local residents to drive through the actual restriction points themselves a limited number of times a year. They are not permits to allow people to leave their “designated 15 minute zone” or whatever else the conspiracy theorists have cooked up this time. A resident of Oxford who owns a car can drive anywhere in the country (including around the ring road to a destination in another part of Oxford) 365 days a year. No permit is or will be required beyond those that everyone has to have if they wish to drive a motorised vehicle in the UK.
  - aww_dang 4y ago
    Thanks for the clarification. Not familiar with the exact layout of Oxford. Seems like it would be difficult to leave your neighborhood if you're blocked behind these bollards. Especially on a one way street. The idea that you're still allowed to drive nationally (for now?) seems like a moot point if you cannot leave your street. From what I've read here, this is mostly for high streets and congested areas. The videos I've seen from the "conspiracy theorists" show residents sabotaging blockades in a residential area. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3224t7U7upQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3224t7U7upQ A simpler way to understand it would be an infringement on their freedom of movement. It isn't hard to see why that is objectionable, no matter the scale. Especially when aligned voices are suggesting that private car ownership is a problem. >That is great. Private car use is insanely inefficient, and has numerous negative externalities like toxic gas exhaust, increasing the risk of injury to people not in a car, and rubber particulates. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34967148 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34967148 >Goodbye car ownership, hello clean air: welcome to the future of transport https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/goodbye-car-ownership-hello-clean-air-this-is-the-future-of-transport/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/goodbye-car-ownership... >There have been numerous examples of personal carbon allowance programs in discussions for the last two decades... https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/09/my-carbon-an-approach-for-inclusive-and-sustainable-cities/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/09/my-carbon-an-approach... >Under a “climate lockdown,” governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling. To avoid such a scenario, we must overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently. https://archive.is/imeYL https://archive.is/imeYL The missing context can easily be found in the talking points of those advancing this agenda. You could also consider giving some of the "conspiracy theorists" a good faith listen, instead of pejoratively dismissing them as such.