8 ms·

The 15-minute city conspiracy theory goes mainstream

27 points by kansaswriter 3y ago

bafe 3y ago
Thanks to conspiracy theorists we can't even have good things. An innocent idea (design cities to have most daily necessities in a reasonable radius) becomes a conspiracy to trap us all
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  I was in a class on geoengineering that had it's last in person session as the coronavirus was closing in on our campus and I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. What I found remarkable back then was that governments were taking very strong measures against the coronavirus and not getting a lot of resistance from the population unlike the situation with global warming where an elaborate system had been built up over 40 years to prevent action. Conspiracy theories and populist resistance took a little while to develop and certain people are in an inflamed state where something like 15 minute cities or efforts to replace gas stoves will now see an intense counterattack within two weeks or less, making our situation for global governance a lot worse than it was in 2020. It makes the issues that Habermas talks about in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) more salient than ever and making it quite critical that governments make legitimacy an important goal, maybe even creating a "department of legitimacy" which could quite directly pay dividends.
  - bafe 3y ago
    It is hard for me to say what drives the loss of (perceived) legitimacy in experts and authorities. As you rightly said, given the global problems we are facing we urgently need more of it. It is just depressing sometimes
    - PaulHoule 3y ago
      ... I've never been as proud as getting a downvote before, even the times when I was shitposting deliberately.
  - prometheus76 3y ago
    You could also call it the "Ministry of Truth". What could go wrong?
  - macinjosh 3y ago
    "department of legitimacy" sounds like the most dystopian BS I have ever heard of. I always thought legitimacy in democracy came through the support of the people which is gained through serving them and their interests. This new form of "democracy" where the elites have all the answers and knows what is best for everyone is the newest form of authoritarianism, IMO. There is no Legitimation Crisis. That phenomenon is a result of society healing itself from the scourge of all authoritarians.
    - HideousKojima 3y ago
      After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of the Writers' Union Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee Which stated that the people Had squandered the confidence of the government And could only win it back By redoubled work [quotas]. Would it not in that case Be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
      - greenyoda 3y ago
        Reference: > "Die Lösung" ("The Solution") is a famous satirical German poem by Bertolt Brecht about the East German uprising of 1953. Written in mid-1953, it is critical of the government and was not published at the time. It was first published in 1959 in the West German newspaper Die Welt."[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung
    - PaulHoule 3y ago
      You read that Habermas book? On one hand you could make the case that popular votes can't change the laws of physics and the limitations of biology and pretending otherwise is a matter of looking into your children's eyes and thinking about them looking into their children's eyes and, given the ever-increasing stakes, some generation soon is going to die unburied. However, there are many good reasons why the "just trust the experts" answer is not tenable not least the self-serving behavior of experts that is proven, the uncertainty in expert judgement that is inevitable, and the sense that you can get much better conformance from people for a decision that they felt they had input into. Habermas makes it clear there is no easy way to square that circle.
  - HideousKojima 3y ago
    Oh no, how dare conspiracy theorists see an attempt to ban gas stoves as... an attempt to ban gas stoves?
    - unethical_ban 3y ago
      How dare Fox entertainment pundits make people think gas stoves are going to be confiscated out of their homes imminently, when the discussion is about considering preventing installation in new builds due to health hazards. Go play with some lead paint and stick it to the libs.
      - HideousKojima 3y ago
        "This is a hidden hazard. Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” Richard Trumka, Jr., CSPC commissioner Quote is from Bloomberg, not Fox: https://archive.ph/pMVey https://archive.ph/pMVey
        unethical_ban 3y ago
        Yes. We agree. Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. I support banning or restricting or discouraging the use of indoor appliances that cause documented health issues to any user. I don't support lead paint or leaded gasoline or smoking near gas pumps. The tyranny.
        HideousKojima 3y ago
        >Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. Citation needed. I don't see that in any of the print articles I can find on Fox, was it on one of their TV segments? Edit: I did find this - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-your-gas-stove https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-yo... And sensationalist headline aside, it's very factual about actual policies (either proposed or being implemented) that will make gas stoves more expensive to purchase and operate. Nowhere does the article claim that the government is planning on busting into houses to take away existing stoves. Edit 2: I have to wonder, if a Republican politician was proposing a ban on the sale of new hybrids, and a leftwing outlet wrote an article with the title "The GOP is coming for your Prius" would you take as much offense at it? The headlines about gas stoves that I've seen don't seem much different than, say, a lot of the headlines I saw from the left about abortion after Row v. Wade was overturned.
  - lp0_on_fire 3y ago
    IMO Global Governance failed in 2020 not because of populist resistance and conspiracy theories but because the people in charge didn't practice what they preached. It didn't help that some governments took the opportunity to "not let a crisis go to waste" and push through unpopular or controversial policy. > I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. This is an interesting analogy. You talk about conspiracy theories and populist resistance (which were and are rampant) but let's not pretend that the "fire fighters" weren't at times sitting inside the very building that's ostensibly on fire drinking fine wine tea and eating fois gras. There were countless examples of the ruling class making exceptions to lockdowns / covid policy for their friends and political causes-du-jour while being outright draconian in restrictions to activities and groups that did not fall in line. The most obvious example in the US being the riots in 2020 surrounding BLM and the George Floyd killing vs people not being allowed to go to church services. Certainly, the zeitgeist from the media and ruling class would lead you to believe one was righteous and good while the other was "literally killing people". Alternatively, if you don't want a "culture war" example: small businesses were forced to shut their doors while big box retailers were allowed to remain open under the guise of being "essential businesses". How many of the small hardware stores survived COVID vs Lowes and Home Depot, both of which made record profits? Or, a more personal example: A very close relative of mine passed during COVID yet we were not allowed to have a funeral for her. We followed all the prescribed precautions - vaccine, masking, social distancing, testing...all of it. When a high-ranking politician (John Lewis) passed, not only was his family allowed a funeral, they managed to have three former Presidents of the United States in attendance!
    - PaulHoule 3y ago
      I like this reply (irrespective of the culture wars aspect) and it does underscore the difficulties. If you got into that Habermas book and its sequels (had to dig them out of deep archive from my Uni library they are so dense) you'd realize the problem is deep. A "department of legitimacy" would have to give out a lot of tough love and crack down on delegitimizing behavior, that's for sure. As case studies I would point out: (1) a sector of Republicans who pursue one kind of legitimacy, "sticking to their guns" and posturing with extreme positions (e.g. they feel like they have at least do something to buy the perception of legitimacy of somebody) and (2) Democrats who take legitimacy for granted (I'm Hillary Clinton, of course I am legitimate). In Hillary's case there was that experience of being on the receiving end of Richard Mellon Scaife's (oddly an unnamed villain in https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibilities-Change/dp/0465085881 https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibi...) war against her husband which convinced her that any illegitimacy perceptions were part of a "vast right wing conspiracy" thus nobody could have convinced her that she could have changed her behavior and won in 2016.
  - LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
    Hrmm. Habermas and Germany. That's funny, because right now there are proposals there which would criminalize to publicly/online question or doubt the 'legitimacy' of anything what their shepherds do. A widening of the already wide applicability of 'hate-spech' laws. *BAAAA!*
mindcrime 3y ago
I used to be something of a populist (not in the "right wing Populism" sense mind), and a big believer in human potential, and thought the future could one day look something like the Star Trek: TNG world. But with every passing day, I become just a tiny hair more misanthropic and believe that all the future holds is a cyberpunk dystopia, and eventually the heat-death of the universe. I'm hoping that I'm wrong, and that events come along and smack me in the face and show me just how wrong I am, in my lifetime. But as it stands today optimism is a hard thing to come by. And that's hard for me to say, as somebody who has spent ~50 years thinking of himself as an optimist at heart. :-( Maybe reading Pinker's The Better Angels of our Nature or something would help restore some of my optimism. Dunno.
- starbase 3y ago
  Curious what makes you feel that way about the future? I ask because on countless objective measures, mankind is better off now than at any time in history. What am I missing? Granted, we've got problems ecological, social, demographic, and so forth. But these don't seem to be greater than the problems we've overcome in the past.
  - mindcrime 3y ago
    Curious what makes you feel that way about the future? Hopefully just "recency bias" and a weird, momentary, glitch in the development of our society! That is to say, hopefully I'm just over-reacting to something very short-term. But to answer the question: There are a lot of factors, and some are probably stronger signals, and some are weaker. So my sentiment right now is more about the summation of a lot of "things" that, taken collectively, seem to me to paint a dismal picture. I mean: (this will be a very US centric list, BTW) 1. A flaming moron and wannabe authoritarian like Donald Trump being elected POTUS. And what appeared to be an associated, pronounced, increase in the overall level of hatred, jingoism, and bigotry during his term.[1] 2. That a senile, decrepit, useless POS like Joe Biden is the best we can do to replace Trump. 3. That Trump is (apparently) being taken seriously as a POTUS candidate again. 4. That Trump or Biden will very likely be the next POTUS. 5. The repeal of Roe vs. Wade 6. That on the Republican side, even though Trump may be the presumptive nominee, there does not seem to be a single member of the group of challengers who is worth a shit. Basically no high profile Republican is willing to be the "adult in the room" and both A. call out Trump for being the piece of shit he is, and B. behave like a reasonable, rational, educated, dignified adult. 7. Climate change, and the lack of progress we seem to be making in addressing it. 8. Economically, we seem pathologically incapable of rooting out corruption, regulatory capture, and cronyism. Creating the kind of Capitalism that should be just a straw-man caricature used by advocates of other ideologies. But no, we've actualized it into reality. 9. Globally, the overall rise in the appeal of authoritarian / dictatorial leaders. 10. Globally, an apparent rise in the appeal of nationalism and the associated behaviors: jingoism, hatred, bigotry, racism. 11. Decaying infrastructure: bridges collapsing, trains derailing, people being killed. 12. Our seeming inability to get a handle on excessive use of force by police. 13. Our inability to reign in "civil asset forfeiture" 14. The rise of nutty conspiracy theories and the cult like behavior of the followers of this crap (qanon, for example, but also this "15 minute city" stuff, etc) 15. Watching our technological progress all too often be used for deleterious ends, and fostering an increase in concentration of power. Facial recognition, gait analysis, etc. being used by governments to surveil their citizenry, etc. 16. Homelessness seems to be on the rise, at least locally in my area. Seems like every couple of weeks or so I see more and more people panhandling around the area, and see more tents popping up in the woods on the edge of highways. I haven't looked up the stats nationwide, but I suspect this is a growing problem all over the US (and maybe in other places). 17. I'm sure I could go on, but what's the point. I imagine anybody reading this either gets the point or they don't (note that that's orthogonal to whether or not anyone agrees that all of these items are, in fact, reasons for despair). [1]: Note - I'm not saying Trump is a racist or anything, or even that he intentionally inspired that kind of behavior in people. But I think the point that he somehow manages to bring out the worst in people is beyond question.
manuelabeledo 3y ago
This may be one of the stupidest conspiracy theories I've ever seen. The very foundation of the 15-minute city is not to ban cars, but to provide all essential services in a close enough radius that people don't need them in the first place. The fact that anyone would rather drive ridiculous distances, either short or long, just to stick it to the lefties, really makes one lose faith in human nature.
- bafe 3y ago
  It is depressing really. People actively protesting about something which is entirely in their interests. It's almost like refusing clean water and sewage
  - smcg 3y ago
    the people "protesting" for this are moneyed business interests, not ordinary people
    - 303uru 3y ago
      I see a lot of Ram 1500 driving, Fox News brain, middle aged men protesting about it (on Facebook), not sure I'd call them ordinary though, so you got me there.
    - bafe 3y ago
      They still manage to capture a significant amount of people to protest on their behalf
- davidw 3y ago
  It's even dumber because "15 minute cities" have been the norm throughout human history when most people walked to things and we didn't have zoning codes that forced automobile usage for even the most basic of everyday needs.
- jjulius 3y ago
  >The fact that anyone would rather drive ridiculous distances, either short or long, just to stick it to the lefties, really makes one lose faith in human nature. Welcome! We have nachos in the back, drinks over on the left, and every second Friday of the month is tropical shirt day.
nyx_land 3y ago
[flagged]
- FollowingTheDao 3y ago
  I think many people are getting bent out of shape because of the surveillance aspect of it. I do not think that is unreasonable. If they build these cities without all the tech BS I will be all for it.
  - i_am_jl 3y ago
    The surveillance aspect of... walkable cities? Is there some sort of bug with HN? You talking about surveillance and your parent comment talking about amerikans... did we read the same article?
- cobrabyte 3y ago
  > Leave it to amerikans Did you miss that this article is about the UK?
  - nyx_land 3y ago
    in my defense this is such a culturally american thing to be opposed to walkable cities that I can scarcely comprehend how a country with a far less car-dependent infrastructure could fall for this nonsense, also I have slept 2.5 hours
- JohnBooty 3y ago
  Leave it to amerikans None of the people named in the story are American. The article is about members of the UK government including the PM reacting to an idea proposed by "Carlos Moreno, a French urban designer and professor at Panthéon-Sorbonne University in Paris." Jordan Peterson (a Canadian) is also mentioned as a supporter of the conspiracy theory. I can see why you jumped to your incorrect assumption, but it is wrong.
local_crmdgeon 3y ago
I see this as an unabridged positive. Your political movement (urbanism, in this case) doesn't matter if it doesn't get traction, and this is what traction looks like in the USA. Kooks come out of the woodwork, grifters will attach themselves, and your policies will slowly be adopted. Seems like progress to me.
- notacoward 3y ago
  > this is what traction looks like in the USA "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Seems apropos here. Bonus fun fact: this is usually attributed to Mahatma Gandhi, but apparently that attribution is questionable. https://apnews.com/article/archive-fact-checking-2315880316 https://apnews.com/article/archive-fact-checking-2315880316
onthecanposting 3y ago
I am really confused about the modern meaning of "conspiracy theory" because hyper-urbanism and reduction or outlawing personal travel for middle class people are open progressive policy goals.
- macinjosh 3y ago
  The purpose of using this terminology is that it is a technique used to frame the reader's view of the story and the actors in it, in a very specific way to achieve the thought patterns desired by the writer/publisher/etc. It is classic in-group vs. out-group non-sense used to divide people. The hint that I am right will be all the downvotes this post receives.
  - xkcd-sucks 3y ago
    At some level it seems deliberate - For example the breathless reporting re: "conspiracy theorists believe that 5G radiation activates microchips in COVID vaccines" seeds a thought terminating cliche in anyone concerned about enabling (more) pervasive surveillance through better data coverage
- plorkyeran 3y ago
  No, outlawing personal travel for middle class people is not an open progressive policy goal and whoever has told you that it is is lying to you.
- cykros 3y ago
  I think the point at which it gets talked about as a conspiracy theory is when a larger agenda and motive are ascribed to those policy goals. Much like it wasn't a conspiracy to invade Iraq, but if it was done with the purpose of enriching say, Halliburton, then the conspiracy involved was in bringing about the policy while hiding the motivation. In this case, the conspiracy theory seems to be that 15 minute cities are being pushed as a way to prevent free movement of people by limiting their access to and use of automobiles and getting them accustomed to staying in one general place.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
xkcd-sucks 3y ago
In consideration of stuff like the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, civil asset forfeiture, the (cold) War on Encryption, etc.: One must assume any kind of sweeping initiative or legal framework will be abused by authoritarians, who are extremely clever at doing so (comparison to security, just because you can't see how a bug can be exploited doesn't mean a clever adversary can't use it to great effect), and it is easier to prevent such things from happening in the first place than it is to unwind them. So opposition to a proposed "War on Urban Sprawl" is rational in the interest of caution.
Lammy 3y ago
I would love for it to not take an entire hour to cross the seven miles of San Francisco. BART designers imagined people being able to traverse the entire Bay Area in roughly half that amount of time: https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5423961825 https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5423961825
motohagiography 3y ago
It’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s a policy objective that is rightly controversial because it specifically targets rural middle and working class people. Even as a Jane Jacobs and Christopher Alexander urban design advocate, it’s clear the 15min city and great reset agenda is the thin edge of the wedge on a Chinese style surveillance society. Politicians and aspiring party members have never liked having to care what working people with competence think, and destroying rural economies by isolating them from cities via anti individual policies, under the auspices of climate FUD, is part of that playbook. 15min city enforcement requires total surveillance and a defacto social credit system, which are a demolition of the societies that produced the prosperity these activists enjoy. It’s not a rational discussion anymore and like a lot of men these days, whenever I hear someone say “conspiracy theory” I just shrug and add steps and reps. These people need to know when to back off.
- jaybrendansmith 3y ago
  A few facts. The 15-minute city is a simple design goal. In the USA, most residential areas are zoned far away from commercial, making this design goal completely impossible without zoning law changes. All cities and towns built before 1910 all met this goal. This goal is not an either-or proposition: You can have a 15-minute city without the removal of cars and personal freedom. In fact personal freedom goes up, because now a middle or working class person can ride their bike to the train if they so choose. They could still take an Uber or Taxi if they wish. Anyone who reads Jane Jacobs or Christopher Alexander should already know this?
  - motohagiography 3y ago
    Getting in and out of the city and maintaining relationships in it is diminished. We see it with the cameras in London today. Stopping sprawl is a worthy goal, but that’s done with planning not with individual movement restrictions and monitoring. These same policy objectives produced the hellscape apartment blocks of outer paris, the poverty traps of council housing, soviet brutalist and anti human towers, and the housing projects we call ghettos. It’s all the same policy urge, which is for a govt to replace their electorates with impoverished dependents whose votes are cheap and whose lives are too tenuous to interfere with political objectives.
whazor 3y ago
Such policies could have dire consequences for the UK. Good road design and good city design go hand in hand. You have less cars on the road when people can safely walk to their doctor or supermarket. How can such legislation help cities? If not creating unforeseen consequences.
spants 3y ago
The 15min city idea is a good idea - but the problem is that they are restricting you to that area.... Do you not want to travel? Where do you family live? Take off the rose-tinted glasses and look around.

27 points by kansaswriter 3y ago

bafe 3y ago

Thanks to conspiracy theorists we can't even have good things. An innocent idea (design cities to have most daily necessities in a reasonable radius) becomes a conspiracy to trap us all

PaulHoule 3y ago
I was in a class on geoengineering that had it's last in person session as the coronavirus was closing in on our campus and I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. What I found remarkable back then was that governments were taking very strong measures against the coronavirus and not getting a lot of resistance from the population unlike the situation with global warming where an elaborate system had been built up over 40 years to prevent action. Conspiracy theories and populist resistance took a little while to develop and certain people are in an inflamed state where something like 15 minute cities or efforts to replace gas stoves will now see an intense counterattack within two weeks or less, making our situation for global governance a lot worse than it was in 2020. It makes the issues that Habermas talks about in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) more salient than ever and making it quite critical that governments make legitimacy an important goal, maybe even creating a "department of legitimacy" which could quite directly pay dividends.
- bafe 3y ago
  It is hard for me to say what drives the loss of (perceived) legitimacy in experts and authorities. As you rightly said, given the global problems we are facing we urgently need more of it. It is just depressing sometimes
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    ... I've never been as proud as getting a downvote before, even the times when I was shitposting deliberately.
- prometheus76 3y ago
  You could also call it the "Ministry of Truth". What could go wrong?
- macinjosh 3y ago
  "department of legitimacy" sounds like the most dystopian BS I have ever heard of. I always thought legitimacy in democracy came through the support of the people which is gained through serving them and their interests. This new form of "democracy" where the elites have all the answers and knows what is best for everyone is the newest form of authoritarianism, IMO. There is no Legitimation Crisis. That phenomenon is a result of society healing itself from the scourge of all authoritarians.
  - HideousKojima 3y ago
    After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of the Writers' Union Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee Which stated that the people Had squandered the confidence of the government And could only win it back By redoubled work [quotas]. Would it not in that case Be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
    - greenyoda 3y ago
      Reference: > "Die Lösung" ("The Solution") is a famous satirical German poem by Bertolt Brecht about the East German uprising of 1953. Written in mid-1953, it is critical of the government and was not published at the time. It was first published in 1959 in the West German newspaper Die Welt."[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    You read that Habermas book? On one hand you could make the case that popular votes can't change the laws of physics and the limitations of biology and pretending otherwise is a matter of looking into your children's eyes and thinking about them looking into their children's eyes and, given the ever-increasing stakes, some generation soon is going to die unburied. However, there are many good reasons why the "just trust the experts" answer is not tenable not least the self-serving behavior of experts that is proven, the uncertainty in expert judgement that is inevitable, and the sense that you can get much better conformance from people for a decision that they felt they had input into. Habermas makes it clear there is no easy way to square that circle.
- HideousKojima 3y ago
  Oh no, how dare conspiracy theorists see an attempt to ban gas stoves as... an attempt to ban gas stoves?
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    How dare Fox entertainment pundits make people think gas stoves are going to be confiscated out of their homes imminently, when the discussion is about considering preventing installation in new builds due to health hazards. Go play with some lead paint and stick it to the libs.
    - HideousKojima 3y ago
      "This is a hidden hazard. Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” Richard Trumka, Jr., CSPC commissioner Quote is from Bloomberg, not Fox: https://archive.ph/pMVey https://archive.ph/pMVey
      - unethical_ban 3y ago
        Yes. We agree. Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. I support banning or restricting or discouraging the use of indoor appliances that cause documented health issues to any user. I don't support lead paint or leaded gasoline or smoking near gas pumps. The tyranny.
        HideousKojima 3y ago
        >Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. Citation needed. I don't see that in any of the print articles I can find on Fox, was it on one of their TV segments? Edit: I did find this - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-your-gas-stove https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-yo... And sensationalist headline aside, it's very factual about actual policies (either proposed or being implemented) that will make gas stoves more expensive to purchase and operate. Nowhere does the article claim that the government is planning on busting into houses to take away existing stoves. Edit 2: I have to wonder, if a Republican politician was proposing a ban on the sale of new hybrids, and a leftwing outlet wrote an article with the title "The GOP is coming for your Prius" would you take as much offense at it? The headlines about gas stoves that I've seen don't seem much different than, say, a lot of the headlines I saw from the left about abortion after Row v. Wade was overturned.
- lp0_on_fire 3y ago
  IMO Global Governance failed in 2020 not because of populist resistance and conspiracy theories but because the people in charge didn't practice what they preached. It didn't help that some governments took the opportunity to "not let a crisis go to waste" and push through unpopular or controversial policy. > I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. This is an interesting analogy. You talk about conspiracy theories and populist resistance (which were and are rampant) but let's not pretend that the "fire fighters" weren't at times sitting inside the very building that's ostensibly on fire drinking fine wine tea and eating fois gras. There were countless examples of the ruling class making exceptions to lockdowns / covid policy for their friends and political causes-du-jour while being outright draconian in restrictions to activities and groups that did not fall in line. The most obvious example in the US being the riots in 2020 surrounding BLM and the George Floyd killing vs people not being allowed to go to church services. Certainly, the zeitgeist from the media and ruling class would lead you to believe one was righteous and good while the other was "literally killing people". Alternatively, if you don't want a "culture war" example: small businesses were forced to shut their doors while big box retailers were allowed to remain open under the guise of being "essential businesses". How many of the small hardware stores survived COVID vs Lowes and Home Depot, both of which made record profits? Or, a more personal example: A very close relative of mine passed during COVID yet we were not allowed to have a funeral for her. We followed all the prescribed precautions - vaccine, masking, social distancing, testing...all of it. When a high-ranking politician (John Lewis) passed, not only was his family allowed a funeral, they managed to have three former Presidents of the United States in attendance!
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    I like this reply (irrespective of the culture wars aspect) and it does underscore the difficulties. If you got into that Habermas book and its sequels (had to dig them out of deep archive from my Uni library they are so dense) you'd realize the problem is deep. A "department of legitimacy" would have to give out a lot of tough love and crack down on delegitimizing behavior, that's for sure. As case studies I would point out: (1) a sector of Republicans who pursue one kind of legitimacy, "sticking to their guns" and posturing with extreme positions (e.g. they feel like they have at least do something to buy the perception of legitimacy of somebody) and (2) Democrats who take legitimacy for granted (I'm Hillary Clinton, of course I am legitimate). In Hillary's case there was that experience of being on the receiving end of Richard Mellon Scaife's (oddly an unnamed villain in https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibilities-Change/dp/0465085881 https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibi...) war against her husband which convinced her that any illegitimacy perceptions were part of a "vast right wing conspiracy" thus nobody could have convinced her that she could have changed her behavior and won in 2016.
- LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
  Hrmm. Habermas and Germany. That's funny, because right now there are proposals there which would criminalize to publicly/online question or doubt the 'legitimacy' of anything what their shepherds do. A widening of the already wide applicability of 'hate-spech' laws. *BAAAA!*

mindcrime 3y ago

I used to be something of a populist (not in the "right wing Populism" sense mind), and a big believer in human potential, and thought the future could one day look something like the Star Trek: TNG world. But with every passing day, I become just a tiny hair more misanthropic and believe that all the future holds is a cyberpunk dystopia, and eventually the heat-death of the universe. I'm hoping that I'm wrong, and that events come along and smack me in the face and show me just how wrong I am, in my lifetime. But as it stands today optimism is a hard thing to come by. And that's hard for me to say, as somebody who has spent ~50 years thinking of himself as an optimist at heart. :-( Maybe reading Pinker's The Better Angels of our Nature or something would help restore some of my optimism. Dunno.

starbase 3y ago
Curious what makes you feel that way about the future? I ask because on countless objective measures, mankind is better off now than at any time in history. What am I missing? Granted, we've got problems ecological, social, demographic, and so forth. But these don't seem to be greater than the problems we've overcome in the past.
- mindcrime 3y ago
  Curious what makes you feel that way about the future? Hopefully just "recency bias" and a weird, momentary, glitch in the development of our society! That is to say, hopefully I'm just over-reacting to something very short-term. But to answer the question: There are a lot of factors, and some are probably stronger signals, and some are weaker. So my sentiment right now is more about the summation of a lot of "things" that, taken collectively, seem to me to paint a dismal picture. I mean: (this will be a very US centric list, BTW) 1. A flaming moron and wannabe authoritarian like Donald Trump being elected POTUS. And what appeared to be an associated, pronounced, increase in the overall level of hatred, jingoism, and bigotry during his term.[1] 2. That a senile, decrepit, useless POS like Joe Biden is the best we can do to replace Trump. 3. That Trump is (apparently) being taken seriously as a POTUS candidate again. 4. That Trump or Biden will very likely be the next POTUS. 5. The repeal of Roe vs. Wade 6. That on the Republican side, even though Trump may be the presumptive nominee, there does not seem to be a single member of the group of challengers who is worth a shit. Basically no high profile Republican is willing to be the "adult in the room" and both A. call out Trump for being the piece of shit he is, and B. behave like a reasonable, rational, educated, dignified adult. 7. Climate change, and the lack of progress we seem to be making in addressing it. 8. Economically, we seem pathologically incapable of rooting out corruption, regulatory capture, and cronyism. Creating the kind of Capitalism that should be just a straw-man caricature used by advocates of other ideologies. But no, we've actualized it into reality. 9. Globally, the overall rise in the appeal of authoritarian / dictatorial leaders. 10. Globally, an apparent rise in the appeal of nationalism and the associated behaviors: jingoism, hatred, bigotry, racism. 11. Decaying infrastructure: bridges collapsing, trains derailing, people being killed. 12. Our seeming inability to get a handle on excessive use of force by police. 13. Our inability to reign in "civil asset forfeiture" 14. The rise of nutty conspiracy theories and the cult like behavior of the followers of this crap (qanon, for example, but also this "15 minute city" stuff, etc) 15. Watching our technological progress all too often be used for deleterious ends, and fostering an increase in concentration of power. Facial recognition, gait analysis, etc. being used by governments to surveil their citizenry, etc. 16. Homelessness seems to be on the rise, at least locally in my area. Seems like every couple of weeks or so I see more and more people panhandling around the area, and see more tents popping up in the woods on the edge of highways. I haven't looked up the stats nationwide, but I suspect this is a growing problem all over the US (and maybe in other places). 17. I'm sure I could go on, but what's the point. I imagine anybody reading this either gets the point or they don't (note that that's orthogonal to whether or not anyone agrees that all of these items are, in fact, reasons for despair). [1]: Note - I'm not saying Trump is a racist or anything, or even that he intentionally inspired that kind of behavior in people. But I think the point that he somehow manages to bring out the worst in people is beyond question.

manuelabeledo 3y ago

This may be one of the stupidest conspiracy theories I've ever seen. The very foundation of the 15-minute city is not to ban cars, but to provide all essential services in a close enough radius that people don't need them in the first place. The fact that anyone would rather drive ridiculous distances, either short or long, just to stick it to the lefties, really makes one lose faith in human nature.

bafe 3y ago
It is depressing really. People actively protesting about something which is entirely in their interests. It's almost like refusing clean water and sewage
- smcg 3y ago
  the people "protesting" for this are moneyed business interests, not ordinary people
  - 303uru 3y ago
    I see a lot of Ram 1500 driving, Fox News brain, middle aged men protesting about it (on Facebook), not sure I'd call them ordinary though, so you got me there.
  - bafe 3y ago
    They still manage to capture a significant amount of people to protest on their behalf
davidw 3y ago
It's even dumber because "15 minute cities" have been the norm throughout human history when most people walked to things and we didn't have zoning codes that forced automobile usage for even the most basic of everyday needs.
jjulius 3y ago
>The fact that anyone would rather drive ridiculous distances, either short or long, just to stick it to the lefties, really makes one lose faith in human nature. Welcome! We have nachos in the back, drinks over on the left, and every second Friday of the month is tropical shirt day.

nyx_land 3y ago

[flagged]

FollowingTheDao 3y ago
I think many people are getting bent out of shape because of the surveillance aspect of it. I do not think that is unreasonable. If they build these cities without all the tech BS I will be all for it.
- i_am_jl 3y ago
  The surveillance aspect of... walkable cities? Is there some sort of bug with HN? You talking about surveillance and your parent comment talking about amerikans... did we read the same article?
cobrabyte 3y ago
> Leave it to amerikans Did you miss that this article is about the UK?
- nyx_land 3y ago
  in my defense this is such a culturally american thing to be opposed to walkable cities that I can scarcely comprehend how a country with a far less car-dependent infrastructure could fall for this nonsense, also I have slept 2.5 hours
JohnBooty 3y ago
Leave it to amerikans None of the people named in the story are American. The article is about members of the UK government including the PM reacting to an idea proposed by "Carlos Moreno, a French urban designer and professor at Panthéon-Sorbonne University in Paris." Jordan Peterson (a Canadian) is also mentioned as a supporter of the conspiracy theory. I can see why you jumped to your incorrect assumption, but it is wrong.

local_crmdgeon 3y ago

I see this as an unabridged positive. Your political movement (urbanism, in this case) doesn't matter if it doesn't get traction, and this is what traction looks like in the USA. Kooks come out of the woodwork, grifters will attach themselves, and your policies will slowly be adopted. Seems like progress to me.

notacoward 3y ago
> this is what traction looks like in the USA "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Seems apropos here. Bonus fun fact: this is usually attributed to Mahatma Gandhi, but apparently that attribution is questionable. https://apnews.com/article/archive-fact-checking-2315880316 https://apnews.com/article/archive-fact-checking-2315880316

onthecanposting 3y ago

I am really confused about the modern meaning of "conspiracy theory" because hyper-urbanism and reduction or outlawing personal travel for middle class people are open progressive policy goals.

macinjosh 3y ago
The purpose of using this terminology is that it is a technique used to frame the reader's view of the story and the actors in it, in a very specific way to achieve the thought patterns desired by the writer/publisher/etc. It is classic in-group vs. out-group non-sense used to divide people. The hint that I am right will be all the downvotes this post receives.
- xkcd-sucks 3y ago
  At some level it seems deliberate - For example the breathless reporting re: "conspiracy theorists believe that 5G radiation activates microchips in COVID vaccines" seeds a thought terminating cliche in anyone concerned about enabling (more) pervasive surveillance through better data coverage
plorkyeran 3y ago
No, outlawing personal travel for middle class people is not an open progressive policy goal and whoever has told you that it is is lying to you.
cykros 3y ago
I think the point at which it gets talked about as a conspiracy theory is when a larger agenda and motive are ascribed to those policy goals. Much like it wasn't a conspiracy to invade Iraq, but if it was done with the purpose of enriching say, Halliburton, then the conspiracy involved was in bringing about the policy while hiding the motivation. In this case, the conspiracy theory seems to be that 15 minute cities are being pushed as a way to prevent free movement of people by limiting their access to and use of automobiles and getting them accustomed to staying in one general place.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

xkcd-sucks 3y ago

In consideration of stuff like the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, civil asset forfeiture, the (cold) War on Encryption, etc.: One must assume any kind of sweeping initiative or legal framework will be abused by authoritarians, who are extremely clever at doing so (comparison to security, just because you can't see how a bug can be exploited doesn't mean a clever adversary can't use it to great effect), and it is easier to prevent such things from happening in the first place than it is to unwind them. So opposition to a proposed "War on Urban Sprawl" is rational in the interest of caution.

Lammy 3y ago

I would love for it to not take an entire hour to cross the seven miles of San Francisco. BART designers imagined people being able to traverse the entire Bay Area in roughly half that amount of time: https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5423961825 https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5423961825

motohagiography 3y ago

It’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s a policy objective that is rightly controversial because it specifically targets rural middle and working class people. Even as a Jane Jacobs and Christopher Alexander urban design advocate, it’s clear the 15min city and great reset agenda is the thin edge of the wedge on a Chinese style surveillance society. Politicians and aspiring party members have never liked having to care what working people with competence think, and destroying rural economies by isolating them from cities via anti individual policies, under the auspices of climate FUD, is part of that playbook. 15min city enforcement requires total surveillance and a defacto social credit system, which are a demolition of the societies that produced the prosperity these activists enjoy. It’s not a rational discussion anymore and like a lot of men these days, whenever I hear someone say “conspiracy theory” I just shrug and add steps and reps. These people need to know when to back off.

jaybrendansmith 3y ago
A few facts. The 15-minute city is a simple design goal. In the USA, most residential areas are zoned far away from commercial, making this design goal completely impossible without zoning law changes. All cities and towns built before 1910 all met this goal. This goal is not an either-or proposition: You can have a 15-minute city without the removal of cars and personal freedom. In fact personal freedom goes up, because now a middle or working class person can ride their bike to the train if they so choose. They could still take an Uber or Taxi if they wish. Anyone who reads Jane Jacobs or Christopher Alexander should already know this?
- motohagiography 3y ago
  Getting in and out of the city and maintaining relationships in it is diminished. We see it with the cameras in London today. Stopping sprawl is a worthy goal, but that’s done with planning not with individual movement restrictions and monitoring. These same policy objectives produced the hellscape apartment blocks of outer paris, the poverty traps of council housing, soviet brutalist and anti human towers, and the housing projects we call ghettos. It’s all the same policy urge, which is for a govt to replace their electorates with impoverished dependents whose votes are cheap and whose lives are too tenuous to interfere with political objectives.

whazor 3y ago

Such policies could have dire consequences for the UK. Good road design and good city design go hand in hand. You have less cars on the road when people can safely walk to their doctor or supermarket. How can such legislation help cities? If not creating unforeseen consequences.

spants 3y ago

The 15min city idea is a good idea - but the problem is that they are restricting you to that area.... Do you not want to travel? Where do you family live? Take off the rose-tinted glasses and look around.