4 ms·

Why does HN love this narrative so much? The article is about very different causes, cars are mentioned only once in passing. It's getting really stale to have

Why does HN love this narrative so much? The article is about very different causes, cars are mentioned only once in passing. It's getting really stale to have to read this same comment over and over rather than people discussing the topics that TFA is actually about.

bakugo 2y ago
> Why does HN love this narrative so much? Because it distracts from the parts that many people don't like to talk about because it goes against their personal beliefs (such as religious conservatives being more connected with their communities and overall happier than everyone else)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- prawn 2y ago
  Where I grew up in Australia, I don't remember anyone besides ethnic grandparents going to church (then or now). It just wasn't any sort of factor in the decline of free play for kids. In more religious countries, are the religious conservatives the ones that are freely roaming streets and socialising more than their peers in a "play-based childhood"? The obvious changes to me, as a parent now, and someone who still visits the street they grew up on in the 80s, relate to cars.
- throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
  You maybe on to something there but you phrase it as antagonistic. HN is heavily biased towards tech centers (SF, NYC, Seattle, etc...). These places skew liberal, agnostic, pro-public transport, pro-dense housing. Conversations will always shift towards these talking points, the few of us that don't fit into one or more of these boxes get drowned out as out-of-touch.
CalRobert 2y ago
Because it's an absolutely huge part of what's wrong with modern life and too many people stubbornly refuse to see that filling our entire world with asphalt ribbons of violent, gruesome death has, in fact, had consequences.
digdugdirk 2y ago
It's actually in the article multiple times. The physical design of communities (i.e. - designed around the automobile, not around a person on foot/bicycle) is what the previous post is referring to, not specifically cars themselves. Car dependent design is the problem that prevents children from being able to play with friends, because they are dependent on an adult to bring them somewhere. Car dependent design also has negative feedback loops for community in other ways. Local shops can't compete with big box chains in the suburbs due to economies of scale and are forced to close, further increasing the need to drive further for basic necessities. Cars are dangerous, further decreasing our base level of trust for interaction with our local community. These are just the surface of the iceberg though - take an open minded approach to reading up on the second and third order effects of car dependent community development before being so quick to dismiss the topic.
- throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
  >Car dependent design is the problem that prevents children from being able to play with friends These statements as facts aren't helpful because it implies car dependence is the only thing. There is so much history and nuance here. OP is right, making every discussion essentially '/r/fuckcars' doesn't get us anywhere. Anecdote: I grew up in a small suburb, 100% car dependence. However I still walked to grade school and rode my bike on roads/sidewalks where cars are the same now as they were in the 90s.
prawn 2y ago
Personally, cars and the increase in street parking (reducing visibility) are the biggest factors in deterring me as a parent from having my kids roam the street with some level of freedom. When driving, I also see how many drivers beside me are looking at their phones. I think back to my childhood and roaming the streets. There wasn't any formal community venue or organisation. No one then or now was going to church. No one was going to a community centre or youth drop-in facility. I don't remember parents coordinating much. We rode bikes on the street, kicked a football and walked to the school basketball court or ovals. Parents generally felt safer about their kids doing that, so it was trivial to walk out front and find another kid to socialise with.
constantcrying 2y ago
It is a big political trend on reddit, mostly it is about American progressives fantasizing about European cities, while having no idea how car centric all of Europe is or the actual causes of the problems they perceive. Just as a hint, Europeans love their cars as well. They drive them a lot and outside of large cities public infrastructure is sparse at best and almost never an actually viable alternative.
- bedobi 2y ago
  I started the thread, I am and grew up in euro, have lived in Japan and North America a well. It's not a fantasy, it's lived experience and hard data.
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    I have never entered the US, but have been to many of the larger European cities. None of them came close to what Americans on /r/fuckcars are fantasizing about, when they talk about Europe. If they post pictures it is almost always of the few square kilometers of the city where millionaires and shops for millionaires are located. The rest of the city is full of streets and cars are everywhere. The one difference is that there are trains, which usually are awful places but get you from A to B.
    - bedobi 2y ago
      It's true all of Europe doesn't look like that, but the difference is real and shouldn't be underestimated. Even in most European single family home suburbs, you can usually walk, bike or transit to nearby schools, supermarket, the odd cafe and restaurant. Ie what's being said isn't that Europe is devoid of cars, it's that it isn't exclusively designed for cars to the point where you cannot exist without one. In a huuuuge share of the US, this is not the case. There are no sidewalks, you have to travel extremely far to get to anything, and cross highways or even freeways doing it. There's no transit. There's no village center or train station around a natural focal point, just giant strip malls that are few and far between. So EVERYONE. MUST. DRIVE. It is the ONLY option for every trip and errand, there is no alternative. This is insane.

bakugo 2y ago

> Why does HN love this narrative so much? Because it distracts from the parts that many people don't like to talk about because it goes against their personal beliefs (such as religious conservatives being more connected with their communities and overall happier than everyone else)

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
prawn 2y ago
Where I grew up in Australia, I don't remember anyone besides ethnic grandparents going to church (then or now). It just wasn't any sort of factor in the decline of free play for kids. In more religious countries, are the religious conservatives the ones that are freely roaming streets and socialising more than their peers in a "play-based childhood"? The obvious changes to me, as a parent now, and someone who still visits the street they grew up on in the 80s, relate to cars.
throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
You maybe on to something there but you phrase it as antagonistic. HN is heavily biased towards tech centers (SF, NYC, Seattle, etc...). These places skew liberal, agnostic, pro-public transport, pro-dense housing. Conversations will always shift towards these talking points, the few of us that don't fit into one or more of these boxes get drowned out as out-of-touch.

CalRobert 2y ago

Because it's an absolutely huge part of what's wrong with modern life and too many people stubbornly refuse to see that filling our entire world with asphalt ribbons of violent, gruesome death has, in fact, had consequences.

digdugdirk 2y ago

It's actually in the article multiple times. The physical design of communities (i.e. - designed around the automobile, not around a person on foot/bicycle) is what the previous post is referring to, not specifically cars themselves. Car dependent design is the problem that prevents children from being able to play with friends, because they are dependent on an adult to bring them somewhere. Car dependent design also has negative feedback loops for community in other ways. Local shops can't compete with big box chains in the suburbs due to economies of scale and are forced to close, further increasing the need to drive further for basic necessities. Cars are dangerous, further decreasing our base level of trust for interaction with our local community. These are just the surface of the iceberg though - take an open minded approach to reading up on the second and third order effects of car dependent community development before being so quick to dismiss the topic.

throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
>Car dependent design is the problem that prevents children from being able to play with friends These statements as facts aren't helpful because it implies car dependence is the only thing. There is so much history and nuance here. OP is right, making every discussion essentially '/r/fuckcars' doesn't get us anywhere. Anecdote: I grew up in a small suburb, 100% car dependence. However I still walked to grade school and rode my bike on roads/sidewalks where cars are the same now as they were in the 90s.

prawn 2y ago

Personally, cars and the increase in street parking (reducing visibility) are the biggest factors in deterring me as a parent from having my kids roam the street with some level of freedom. When driving, I also see how many drivers beside me are looking at their phones. I think back to my childhood and roaming the streets. There wasn't any formal community venue or organisation. No one then or now was going to church. No one was going to a community centre or youth drop-in facility. I don't remember parents coordinating much. We rode bikes on the street, kicked a football and walked to the school basketball court or ovals. Parents generally felt safer about their kids doing that, so it was trivial to walk out front and find another kid to socialise with.

constantcrying 2y ago

It is a big political trend on reddit, mostly it is about American progressives fantasizing about European cities, while having no idea how car centric all of Europe is or the actual causes of the problems they perceive. Just as a hint, Europeans love their cars as well. They drive them a lot and outside of large cities public infrastructure is sparse at best and almost never an actually viable alternative.

bedobi 2y ago
I started the thread, I am and grew up in euro, have lived in Japan and North America a well. It's not a fantasy, it's lived experience and hard data.
- constantcrying 2y ago
  I have never entered the US, but have been to many of the larger European cities. None of them came close to what Americans on /r/fuckcars are fantasizing about, when they talk about Europe. If they post pictures it is almost always of the few square kilometers of the city where millionaires and shops for millionaires are located. The rest of the city is full of streets and cars are everywhere. The one difference is that there are trains, which usually are awful places but get you from A to B.
  - bedobi 2y ago
    It's true all of Europe doesn't look like that, but the difference is real and shouldn't be underestimated. Even in most European single family home suburbs, you can usually walk, bike or transit to nearby schools, supermarket, the odd cafe and restaurant. Ie what's being said isn't that Europe is devoid of cars, it's that it isn't exclusively designed for cars to the point where you cannot exist without one. In a huuuuge share of the US, this is not the case. There are no sidewalks, you have to travel extremely far to get to anything, and cross highways or even freeways doing it. There's no transit. There's no village center or train station around a natural focal point, just giant strip malls that are few and far between. So EVERYONE. MUST. DRIVE. It is the ONLY option for every trip and errand, there is no alternative. This is insane.