Living Car Free - Is it a political act to ride a bicycle?

The topic came up on another thread, and several people seemed interested.

I know that we can have a lively discussion without resorting to personal attacks or name calling.

Just about anything you do is a political act, but that's not why I ride. Some drivers may interpret it as political, but I think most just ignore me.

Just about anything you do is a political act, but that's not why I ride. Some drivers may interpret it as political, but I think most just ignore me.

+1 Just about anything you do can be interpreted as political. Maybe in some areas of the United States where people bike a lot more and the infrastructure is better then it may not be such a politically charged activity. However, during my time in Portland, often said to be the most bike friendly city in the USA, it felt even more charged.

It is only a political statement if the rider is doing it as such. Car free cyclists probably aren't doing it as a political statement because we just like to use bicycles instead of cars. It makes financial sense and for some people it even saves time compared to driving a car within a congested city.

My cycling is mostly for environmental reasons. The other benefits are secondary.

Yes and no.

I think that any individual trip has had zero political value. I ride to get somewhere in the most practical manner.

But somehow cumulatively, I've come to think that perhaps bicycling is the most political thing that I do. Being out on the highways for decades on end, having dealt with friends and family about it, my bicycling has become a shout for rational ways of transportation. And having done it for decades, has proven it to be a reasonable form of transportation.

I don't think the action itself is one unless you actually have some big sticker or perhaps a flag in a way that makes it a tool in the persons political statement regardless of what it is.

To someone who bicycling threatens/supports their beliefs or political opinions it can be an act against them especially if the rider is obviously not one out of just exercise. Whether I was driving an alternative fueled vehicle or riding a bike I always get approached and lectured that I can't tell them what to do or kudos that we need more people doing what I do. In both cases I didn't say or do anything except enter their field of vision.

political? not really.

environmental/social statement? yes.

critical mass is one time when the line between just riding and making a statement are blurred.. but i would hardly call that "political." to me, politics means greasing palms, ramming legislation through, that kind of stuff.

For me ....... absolutely not. I ride for my own personal benefit.


Even when I did not own a car, I did not own a car because owning a car would not have been financially adventageous for me ... and commuting to work by bicycle was financially adventageous.

There will be a minority group that does everything for political reasons if nothing
more than to protest. However, since one has to sweat and work I doubt that most
cyclist even consider politics as a reason to bike. It's the fun, the money saved,
& the health benefits.

There will be a minority group that does everything for political reasons if nothing more than to protest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL60GS90KSc

:thumb:

So if cycling is a political act, then that would mean that all cyclists are Republicans? :twitchy:

The topic came up on another thread, and several people seemed interested.

I know that we can have a lively discussion without resorting to personal attacks or name calling.

You must know by now that putting that in your opening post is a virtual guarantee that we'll be making disparaging remarks about each other's parentage by the 2nd page. :D

...and no, for me the act of riding a bike is transportational and/or recreational. Political isn't even on my radar.

Actions speak louder than words... pretty much any action you take has a political connotation to it. you may not intend it too but it does. living car free is extremely political. you may do it solely for necessity but by doing so you are deviant. this forces others to form an opinion of your actions.

Maybe the most popular political endeavor for cyclists is the field of bicycle advocacy. This refers, basically, to efforts to encourage more people to cycle, and efforts to make cycling more attractive to more people. In this area, I think we come close to the idea that cycling is a political act. When people see you riding your bike, they may be more likely to ride themselves, especially if your ride appears to be fun, or beneficial in some other way.

It can be. I try to keep it as a just for fun thing, but it can be tough to keep it that way-- sometimes, when the weather's really nasty, I have to remind myself that I'm not obligated to ride.

One thing that sets me off is being harassed by drivers. If someone yells at me, or people are passing too close, I get into a really foul mood and am liable to go off on the next person I see about cars and car culture. That's really not a good frame of mind to be in.

Al Gore : Moral, not political.

Al Gore : Moral, not political.

OK...explain the difference and how it applies here.

I'm not sure what a political act is. If by political act, you mean cycling becomes a vote or statement of thought about how society should conduct itself.... then, yes. It is a political act. I cycle for a number of reasons... mostly fun... but I am very aware that burning gasoline in a car might necessitate another war and certainly the loss of innocent lives. So biking is a statement along with everything else.

Of course, here's an article about Michael Pollan who argues that eating is a political act. (http://www.alternet.org/environment/105667/michael_pollan:_eating_is_a_political_act/)

I'm not sure what a political act is....

Me neither, but evidently it's a wide definition. On the first page of a Google search (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&q=what+is+a+political+act%3F), the following are all said to be political acts:


feminist therapy,
performance,
architecture,
the country of Burma,
poetry,
eating,
acting,
baking bread,
optimism, and
violence
.

One thing that sets me off is being harassed by drivers. If someone yells at me, or people are passing too close, I get into a really foul mood and am liable to go off on the next person I see about cars and car culture. That's really not a good frame of mind to be in.

I used to be like that many years ago and it landed me in the slammer a few times, fortunately just to cool my heels overnight.... so many times I came that close to doing something stupid enough to have me spending the rest of my life sitting in a cell regretting my actions.

I'm so glad I'm not that person any more..... it's just not worth it. Not much bothers me now, so long as nobody messes with my family, especially with my kids.

Al Gore : Moral, not political.

I agree with this one. In my case, I gave up the car as a purely personal response to what I perceive as very serious world-wide environmental threats (global warming, massive global over-consumption, etc.). I got rid of the car primarily because it seemed like the right thing to do; that is, it was a moral choice. I have never expected that my choice would change society at large even a little bit; if I did, that would make it a political choice.

But honestly, on a day-to-day basis, it's not moral or political at all: I'm home, watching football on TV. I notice there's no beer in the fridge. I jump on the bike and go to the store. It's not any kind of statement at all; it's just transportation.

Here's a guy who thinks riding is a political act--one he vehemently opposes:


Rob Anderson is the guy who successfully challenged San Francisco's implementation of a bike plan, by claiming in court that the bike plan must undergo an environmental review just like any other transportation plan. According to the Wall Street Journal, Anderson believes I ride my bike for political reasons!

"Regardless of the obvious dangers, some people will ride bikes in San Francisco for the same reason Islamic fanatics will engage in suicide bombings -- because they are politically motivated to do so," he wrote in a May 21 post. Anderson claims he fights cycling because of our thought crimes of a "holier-than-thou" attitude and because many cyclists ride dangerously on city streets, zipping by dangerously closely to him and other pedestrians. Anderson is car-free, so I'm a little bemused that he doesn't also criticize motorists for the same attitudes and behaviors. When it comes to entitlement attitudes, dangerous behavior and actual risk, motorists have cyclists beat by a long ways.

from Bicycle Blog (http://www.cyclelicio.us/2008/08/rob-anderson-says-i-ride-because-of.html) on cycleicio.us

Off topic but interesting: I found this thread on Google (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&q=bicycle+political+act) about 8 hours after I posted it. Amazing....just a couple years ago you would wait days and weeks for a web page to show up on a search engine.


(http://www.bikeforums.net/)Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/)
Jan 20, 2009 ... bike and bicycle discussion forums. ... Is it a political act to... by Roody. 01 -21-09 09:29 PM Go to last post ...
www.bikeforums.net/ - 106k - (http://www.bikeforums.net/)Cached (http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:RKvVsvjcyP4J:www.bikeforums.net/+bicycle+political+act&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us) - (http://www.bikeforums.net/)Similar pages (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&q=related:www.bikeforums.net/)
(http://www.bikeforums.net/)

One thing that sets me off is being harassed by drivers. If someone yells at me, or people are passing too close, I get into a really foul mood and am liable to go off on the next person I see about cars and car culture. That's really not a good frame of mind to be in.

You may want to consider a little meditation training. That can help you retain your center and get less perturbed by jerk motorists. It's helped me. And, although it doesn't yet let me enjoy serenity in all incidents, I can usually drop it within a block and return to being here now on my bicycle.

Depends on which bike I am riding:D I have one of the zero gas stickers (http://www.zeropergallon.com/stickers.html) on my shopping bike, buddy of mine gave it to me as a joke, I slapped on the back of that bike and get plenty of questions about it. I have also been accused of being UnAmerican because I ride a bike instead of driving a fuel sucking SUV:rolleyes: Little do they know (http://image52.webshots.com/452/7/20/50/2263720500066886751NeUkei_fs.jpg):eek:;)

Other bikes I ride for the pure enjoyment of riding, or to get somewhere.

Aaron:)

Can be if you want it to be. Depends on how thoughtful the cyclists is.. Example . Some motorists demand you to be taken off 'their' patch of asphalt. If you fight back, that is political.. Sometimes, were just on the road for recreational purposes. When we are enjoying ourselves, are we political.?. But, as soon as you resist that motorist who takes your place in the bike lane; you might unknowingly become political. All rights are determined by the law. Cycling is a right.. So, how can it not but be political.. Your rights are offended, do you not go to the police, the city hall, or the DA.. Proof enough. !.

I don't think of cycling as a political statement in terms of what party or candidate I support. However, I do think continued utility cycling does show cycling as a viable means of transportation and everything that supports, such as lessening America's reliance on foreign oil without the need for more domestic drilling, concerns about pollution and the environment, concerns about over-extending our military to back our interests in foreign natural resources, cutting off funding to terrorist groups and supporting nations who receive money from oil, etc.

OK...explain the difference and how it applies here.

Well, Socrates once said that it is better to be the victim of an act of aggression rather than being the aggressor.

In most cases, when you can ride a bike you will run out of breath before you can afford to even start any aggression. On cars, you use a tiny fraction of your right calf muscle (gastrocnemius), allowing for plenty of rage to brew up.

I'm not sure what a political act is. If by political act, you mean cycling becomes a vote or statement of thought about how society should conduct itself.... then, yes. It is a political act. I cycle for a number of reasons... mostly fun... but I am very aware that burning gasoline in a car might necessitate another war and certainly the loss of innocent lives. So biking is a statement along with everything else.

Of course, here's an article about Michael Pollan who argues that eating is a political act. (http://www.alternet.org/environment/105667/michael_pollan:_eating_is_a_political_act/)

The act of eating and the meanings that people associate with it are one of the first things that you study as an anthropologist. Eating is perhaps one of the most political acts that most people do everyday and their is a vast amount of anthropological and sociological evidence along those lines. With that in mind, most people do not think about politics while eating, or preparing to eat, or after eating. Politics is not WHY people choose to eat one thing or another, or at least its not how people actively reference their food choices.

Similarly, I think that riding a bike for transportation is a very political act. However, just like a lot of you guys are saying, you do not ride to make a political statement to others. I read from that that you dont really care if others follow your lead but that you want to still stay on your own path of being car free or lite. However, does a vegetarians eating habit become less political because they are not trying to convert others?

Point being, that a lot of our choices in life are political in the broad definition that is often attributed to it. We simply to do not walk around thinking about politics all the time when we do these things. A lot of people have mentioned that they do not think biking places is political but at the same time they say that they bike for environmental reasons or to maintain their health. Are these not political issues?

Maybe we should collectively come up with a reasonable definition of what makes something a political act because it seems that a lot of us are actually on the same page but that we have different criteria for what makes one action or another political. Some seem to be thinking that political actions require that you are trying to convince others that your decisions or actions are the only ones or the best ones. However, I think that that is a little narrow because other people still perceive what you are doing as being politically related. In a different forum I posted a few examples of this and apparently offended some people unknowingly. Unfortunately any example i give is going to be politically charged because those are the examples that make this distinction so clear. I am not a bigot to so dont get in my face please.

How about two gay men openly holding hands or kissing in a park? To them they are just showing their affections for each other just like they do at home or anywhere else. However, many people might say that they are trying to make a statement or put gay culture within view of the average american. In some ways is this not completely different from what a cyclist does when they ride on the roads that are clearly designed for automobiles?

Of course not everyone will be so narrow minded when they see a cyclist or a gay couple and jump to conclusions or even the same conclusions. However, out of sight is out of mind and vice versa.

That is why I think that biking is political, wether the biker intends it or not is irrelevant.

I think Zeppinger makes some excellent points. An act can be political even if it isn't intended that way. As a gay man myself, I'm well aware that any public affection will probably end up being confrontational and "political"--even if I have the totally pure motivation of expressing or demonstrating my love for another person.

But I'm not sure cycling is quite the same, for the simple reason that no political interpretation is even anticipated, because bike riding isn't usually controversial. But what if they yell at me to get on the sidewalk, and I stop to explain that I have a right to ride in the street, and I intend to use that right even if they don't approve? At that point a political act has clearly occurred. But, unlike the gay handholding, the political consequences were not anticipated.

I think...but I could be wrong.

That is why I think that biking is political, wether the biker intends it or not is irrelevant.

I think your opinion about the inherent political nature of cycling is irrelevant. What your intent is by pressing this form of naval gazing is beyond my guessing powers.

I think your opinion about the inherent political nature of cycling is irrelevant. What your intent is by pressing this form of naval gazing is beyond my guessing powers.

I'd only say that he has as much right to gaze at his navel (not naval) as you do. And he has the right to share any thoughts (or lint) that come to him as he's gazing.

And that, my friend, is a political statement.

God I hope its not some kina political statement . I ride for fun and to lose weight for my health .Iam no green freak or save the world type person ! I use those funny light bulbs because they save me money . I guess the day I rode by the McCain Headquarters and carried my sign home on my bike is as close to a political statement as my bike has ever made . I own 2 cars and 3 bikes . I live just south of the motor city Detroit the most unfriendly bicycle place I have ever saw and I been a LOT a places . Nuff said I think The city I live in I don't think has a bike rack in it amazing but true Iam trying to get one put at the main park were NO bikes are allowed to ride in it and one at city hall.

I figure if we can't ride the bikes in the park they should atleast put a rack up and a place to park and lock yours up ! But I digress If there is anything political about riding a bicycle its in your mind ! Thats my 2 cents . Here on BF is a place to talk bicycles and riding them who we vote for and what our non bicycle views are don't interest me here nor does it influnce how I look at someone .

I'd only say that he has as much right to gaze at his navel (not naval) as you do. And he has the right to share any thoughts (or lint) that come to him as he's gazing.

And that, my friend, is a political statement.

Sure that's right, his opinions on whatever whimsical notion strikes his fancy is as relevant to this forum as your personal preferences in companionship. Both of you are free to gab about such irrelevant topics as much as you like; but who cares?

God I hope its not some kina political statement . I ride for fun and to lose weight for my health .Iam no green freak or save the world type person ! I use those funny light bulbs because they save me money . I guess the day I rode by the McCain Headquarters and carried my sign home on my bike is as close to a political statement as my bike has ever made . I own 2 cars and 3 bikes . I live just south of the motor city Detroit the most unfriendly bicycle place I have ever saw and I been a LOT a places . Nuff said I think The city I live in I don't think has a bike rack in it amazing but true Iam trying to get one put at the main park were NO bikes are allowed to ride in it and one at city hall.

I figure if we can't ride the bikes in the park they should atleast put a rack up and a place to park and lock yours up ! But I digress If there is anything political about riding a bicycle its in your mind ! Thats my 2 cents . Here on BF is a place to talk bicycles and riding them who we vote for and what our non bicycle views are don't interest me here nor does it influnce how I look at someone .

I don't think of bikes as being political as in Democrat vs. Republican, either. But there are issues (like bike racks and where we can ride) that are very political, and that most cyclists are interested in.

Sure that's right, his opinions on whatever whimsical notion strikes his fancy is as relevant to this forum as your personal preferences in companionship. Both of you are free to gab about such irrelevant topics as much as you like; but who cares?

Everybody who responds to the thread cares. Especially you. :p

I don't think of bikes as being political as in Democrat vs. Republican, either. But there are issues (like bike racks and where we can ride) that are very political, and that most cyclists are interested in.

When opinions begin to diverge sharply, politics seems to rear its head. While a group of people view riding a bicycle as a means of reducing the choking congestion of cities, many regard their right to charge down the freeway in a Hummer as their right. That's why the Hummer became so much the target of environmentalists and other thoughtful people. Even if the driver is not particularly Republican or Democrat, their whole way of life is a statement of opinion/point of view. Hence politics. Everywhere... politics.

Al Gore : Moral, not political.

What does this mean? I think it is the other way around, Political, not moral.


So if cycling is a political act, then that would mean that all cyclists are Republicans? :twitchy:

This makes more sense?

I will send a PM to those subscribers asking for clarification.

Advocating alternative transportation is political. Fighting obesity is in part political. deciding to reduce oil consumption is political.. All these subjects can be a part of the cycling culture , whether one chooses to admit it or not.

Al Gore : Moral, not political.


OK...explain the difference and how it applies here.


Well, Socrates once said that it is better to be the victim of an act of aggression rather than being the aggressor.

In most cases, when you can ride a bike you will run out of breath before you can afford to even start any aggression. On cars, you use a tiny fraction of your right calf muscle (gastrocnemius), allowing for plenty of rage to brew up.

I don't get the answer. In fact, when pumped up riding a bike, I think you can be as, or maybe even more aggressive than a cager. But what does this have to do with Algore?

Ray LaHood is the new Secretary of Transportation. He's reported to be a friend of cycling , unlike the last Secretary- Mary Peters. And, both are Republicans.

If I remember my first year of college, there are at least three definitions of "politics":


Pertaining to government, ideology, and parties or factions
The use of power and persuasion to coordinate large human endeavors
A "turf battle" concerning the use or distribution of scarce resources

I think the last one is most germane to cycling. The scarce resources we're battling for are space on the road and government funds for cycling infrastructure.

The second definition sometimes enters into the cycling picture, when we talk about massive bicycle infrastructure or even trying to facilitate or design a township's plan to extend a bike path.

The first--government and parties--is less relevant to cycling, IMO.

If I remember my first year of college, there are at least three definitions of "politics":


Pertaining to government, ideology, and parties or factions
The use of power and persuasion to coordinate large human endeavors
A "turf battle" concerning the use or distribution of scarce resources

I think the last one is most germane to cycling. The scarce resources we're battling for are space on the road and government funds for cycling infrastructure.

The second definition sometimes enters into the cycling picture, when we talk about massive bicycle infrastructure or even trying to facilitate or design a township's plan to extend a bike path.

The first--government and parties--is less relevant to cycling, IMO.

I see where your coming from Roody, but I do read a lot of Ideology being thrown around on this here cycling forum. Heck we even have different parties and factions, Roadies, Cagers, Fixie kids, Tourers, commuters, ect.... infinity. I think they all apply pretty well. :)

We might deny our riding is at all political.. But, politics sure determines our riding. From the Federal DOT.. Deciding whether our riding is worth their expenditures. So, since politics affects us, our politics can't affect them( governmental agencies that affect cycling).
..

A market analysis approach can be used to estimate the maximum potential number of bicycling and walking trips in an area.

http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/vol2/sec2.12.htm
,,,

1.1 Overview

This document is the second volume of the two-volume Guidebook on Methods to Estimate Non-Motorized Travel where the first volume, Overview of Methods, provides a concise overview of available methods for predicting future levels of bicycle and pedestrian travel or "travel demand." The Overview of Methods also discusses general issues for consideration in forecasting demand for non-motorized travel. This volume, the Supporting Documentation, provides substantially more detail on the methods described in the guidebook and identifies sources and real-world applications of the methods.

http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/vol2/sect_1.htm

I don't get the answer. In fact, when pumped up riding a bike, I think you can be as, or maybe even more aggressive than a cager.

I'm a small, rather unathletic person, with at best a 0.85 hp power output with a total body+vehicle weight at 150 lbs. A typical car is 4,000 lbs for a midsize, with a 150-hp engine! So even at my max, I don't really want to mess with cars, because they can really mess me up. You can more easily claim moral superiority by being the victim of a collision if the vehicle demonstrates the slightest bit of arrogance outside of the law.

The exception is when one absolutely violates the law, for example, a car getting mowed down by a 800,000-lb. 4000-hp Amtrak at a grade crossing. Then the train is vindicated.


But what does this have to do with Algore?
My original post mentioning Al Gore might have been a little misleading.

If cycling is to be meant as an act for environmental activism, then sure it is political. This is because people disagree over some facts; for example, some people still deny the significance of global warming despite scientific consensus.

From a moral standpoint, the bicyclist, as long as he/she follows the traffic laws, cannot be morally attacked in the case of a collision with a car. This is because the nature of a democracy entails that everyone is equal under the law. The subtle part is that you can artificially attempt to violate the equality by driving a 6000-libra missile on the road. However, this artificial superiority serves to magnify the risk at which that person can abuse the excess. From a probabilistic standpoint the person is more likely to be corrupt because a great deal of artificial power is in his/her hands, viz., with the twitch of the calf muscle.

Compare this to a two-automobile accident, where the blame is distributed to both parties, although usually one party gets the majority of the blame. Likewise, do not try to get into an accident with another bicyclist as soon as insurance companies start to attempt to address bicycle accidents.

I see where your coming from Roody, but I do read a lot of Ideology being thrown around on this here cycling forum. Heck we even have different parties and factions, Roadies, Cagers, Fixie kids, Tourers, commuters, ect.... infinity. I think they all apply pretty well. :)

Too true. The Advocacy & Safety subforum is the bloodiest political battleground I've ever seen, outside of the Godfather. :D

I'm a small, rather unathletic person, with at best a 0.85 hp power output with a total body+vehicle weight at 150 lbs. A typical car is 4,000 lbs for a midsize, with a 150-hp engine! So even at my max, I don't really want to mess with cars, because they can really mess me up. You can more easily claim moral superiority by being the victim of a collision if the vehicle demonstrates the slightest bit of arrogance outside of the law.

The exception is when one absolutely violates the law, for example, a car getting mowed down by a 800,000-lb. 4000-hp Amtrak at a grade crossing. Then the train is vindicated.


My original post mentioning Al Gore might have been a little misleading.

If cycling is to be meant as an act for environmental activism, then sure it is political. This is because people disagree over some facts; for example, some people still deny the significance of global warming despite scientific consensus.

From a moral standpoint, the bicyclist, as long as he/she follows the traffic laws, cannot be morally attacked in the case of a collision with a car. This is because the nature of a democracy entails that everyone is equal under the law. The subtle part is that you can artificially attempt to violate the equality by driving a 6000-libra missile on the road. However, this artificial superiority serves to magnify the risk at which that person can abuse the excess. From a probabilistic standpoint the person is more likely to be corrupt because a great deal of artificial power is in his/her hands, viz., with the twitch of the calf muscle.

Compare this to a two-automobile accident, where the blame is distributed to both parties, although usually one party gets the majority of the blame. Likewise, do not try to get into an accident with another bicyclist as soon as insurance companies start to attempt to address bicycle accidents.

So I guess you're saying that the weakest party has moral superiority, and will ultimately prevail? That sounds more like Gandhi than Al Gore.

Maybe we should collectively come up with a reasonable definition of what makes something a political act because it seems that a lot of us are actually on the same page but that we have different criteria for what makes one action or another political. Some seem to be thinking that political actions require that you are trying to convince others that your decisions or actions are the only ones or the best ones. However, I think that that is a little narrow because other people still perceive what you are doing as being politically related.

That is why I think that biking is political, wether the biker intends it or not is irrelevant.

You have a point here; it is a matter of semantics. My definition of "political" is narrower than yours. And I agree with you that others may see your actions as political, even provocative, regardless of your own intentions. I think most of us have managed to antagonize at least one motorist simply by being on the road at all.

I ride (bike-commute) while others at my workplace proclaim themselves G-R-E-E-N but that just kinda makes me laugh.

But I ride for me ... health, stress-relief, weigh control, etc. I also save money on car wear-tear and some gas but I think I make that up in additional food consumed.

Political? Nah. It's just a habit of mine and it makes me feel good.

Andy

You have a point here; it is a matter of semantics. My definition of "political" is narrower than yours. And I agree with you that others may see your actions as political, even provocative, regardless of your own intentions. I think most of us have managed to antagonize at least one motorist simply by being on the road at all.

Cool, I am glad that you and I found some common ground.