3 ms·
I don't think so; the emergent urbanism conversation is a step in the right direction. The anti-car stuff is extremely toxic because a large segment of society
by nayuki 4y ago
I don't think so; the emergent urbanism conversation is a step in the right direction.
The anti-car stuff is extremely toxic because a large segment of society refuses to listen. Induced demand is how every lane-widening project is a huge money sink while failing to deliver on the promise of reduced congestion. You think complaining about death machines is comparable to the thousands of people inside and outside of cars who have near-death experiences every day due to cars? Or people losing autonomy and dignity by losing the ability to drive is not toxic? These topics have been politely brushed under the rug for too long.
Is it wrong for disenfranchised people to express their frustration? Are they required to empathize and understand their abusers?
Sensible solutions? They've been put forth ad nauseum already. Ending single-family exclusive zoning. Enabling mixed residential-commercial areas. Reducing commute distances. Funding public mass transit. Ending parking minimums. Tolling roads and mileage. Recognizing that roads are overbuilt and there is not enough tax base to maintain them.
Anti-car people know very well why people like cars. The dominant culture is kind of hard to ignore. The most common reasons are a sense of autonomy, the fact that working and doing errands without a car will increase travel time by several multiples, and the fact that it's a comfortable norm that almost everybody has accepted (can't go wrong with the herd right?).
- joenot443 4y ago> You think complaining about death machines is comparable to the thousands of people inside and outside of cars who have near-death experiences every day due to cars? This is a wildly uncharitable and disingenuous reading of their comment. I stopped reading yours at that point, I'm sure you can do better.
- nayuki 4y agoHow am I being wildly uncharitable and disingenuous? The post I was replying to said: > the anti-car stuff is becoming extremely toxic and [...] finding slightly different ways to describe cars as death machines I'm refuting the complaint about the anti-car conversation being extremely toxic because the reality of car-dominant culture is toxic. If you stopped reading my comment, aren't you choosing polarization over reconciliation? Want to see toxic? Here are a couple of posts plucked from the r/FuckCars front page: https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/128yjd9/i_just_want_to_walk_in_my_neighborhood/ https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/128yjd9/i_just_wa... - The norm of cars parked on and blocking the sidewalk. Do pedestrians and wheelchair users not have rights? https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/1291pfo/my_foot_got_stuck_on_the_pedal/ https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/1291pfo/my_foot_g... - Car-ped collision, driver brushes it off as "oops wrong pedal". https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/128qx21/cue_the_parking_lot_full_of_useless_egotanks/ https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/128qx21/cue_the_p... - Employee gets hassled for storing bike at workplace, no such treatment for storing a car. https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/129iogc/for_the_past_2_months_this_subway_exit_is_closed/ https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/129iogc/for_the_p... - One driver having an accident inconveniences many thousands of people. Is this not a lopsided power structure? Car culture is the dominant default. It's too easy to brush off non-drivers' problems as trivial and not worth solving.