Understanding Backlash Against Car-Free Advocacy
#51
Senior Member
I guess I don't; Detroit prospered because of the car industry, and declined because of the decline of that industry which didn't respond to consumer's wishes, and foriegn competition which did a better job of making cars people wanted.
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
They have GREAT cycling infrastructure in Detroit (or... so I've read) and a person can pick-up a 3 bedroom ranch for less than 10 grand. Cycling opportunities and cheap housing are two great selling points for a car free living environment. So why aren't cyclist like ourselves clamoring to Detroit to enjoy the bright lights, culture sights, great dining, and other great big city amenities?
#53
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
1,031 Posts
Posting about the personal benefits of choosing to live without a car and/or getting about by bicycle could be considered positive advocacy for car free living.
The same can not be said for posting ad nauseam anti-motoring/anti-motorist rants, as well as posts that assume that car free living and bicycling are joined at the hip with asceticism, New Age day dreaming, and spacy economic/political theories.
The same can not be said for posting ad nauseam anti-motoring/anti-motorist rants, as well as posts that assume that car free living and bicycling are joined at the hip with asceticism, New Age day dreaming, and spacy economic/political theories.
#54
Prefers Cicero
I have noticed that when car-free living is promoted as a solution to social-economic problems, there is a tendency for backlash. At first, this backlash seemed as simple as any other form of backlash against criticism of status-quo. The roots of this kind of backlash would be as simple as, "I drive therefore anyone doing otherwise is implying that my choice to drive isn't the best choice and therefore denigrating and threatening me."
Now, however, I have started to think that the cause of backlash could go even deeper, having to do with the mainstreaming of motor-transit itself.
Now, however, I have started to think that the cause of backlash could go even deeper, having to do with the mainstreaming of motor-transit itself.
#55
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
1,031 Posts
It shouldn't be too hard for any rational person or group to marginalize and ridicule "car-free thinking" (as it is presented in the emotional anti-motorist bashing and spacy social/political day dreaming so often posted on LCF). Especially in a public forum where no Mods are at hand to protect delicate sensitivities from feeling insulted or slighted.
#57
Prefers Cicero
It is literally impossible to go back and change these things now, so ownership of private vehicles and subsidization of roads are necessary to keep the economy humming and keep peoples investments in their homes from plummeting to nothing. This is not a value judgement, it's just the way things are.
Last edited by cooker; 01-13-14 at 02:43 PM.
#59
Prefers Cicero
Perhaps the reason why there is now a larger percentage living in urban areas is simply due to the fact that the population has increased- and habitats have to be crammed together/stacked or lose agricultural lands for housing.
And bio-fuels might just replace the fossil fuels yet- algae can be turned into oil in an hour. https://www.cnbc.com/id/101287355
And bio-fuels might just replace the fossil fuels yet- algae can be turned into oil in an hour. https://www.cnbc.com/id/101287355
The economy was heavily dependent on whale oil until it was depleted, and there was a crisis, and an urgent and rapid transition to petroleum. We're not going back to biofuels. There's no way agriculture can both feed the world and fuel it, and certainly not with modern farming techniques that are highly fuel dependent.
Last edited by cooker; 01-13-14 at 02:42 PM.
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
I am a little frustrated with the federal government now supporting failed cities with my (and millions of others) tax dollars. It's nice that someone like you is trying to off-set the mistreatment.
I don't see the need to be a city dweller... to live car free. Actually rural areas most often cram all the things needed for modern life in the small town. Generally a gas station, hardware, grocery, restaurants, church's, post office, library, community center, doctor, fire station/EMT... and so forth... all within easy walking distance.
Rural living might be a better choice for those who desire simpler living.
Last edited by Dave Cutter; 01-13-14 at 02:51 PM.
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 83 Times
in
44 Posts
Yeppers!
You're paying people to live in the burbs? I live in a city now.... but if you're so loaded that you are willing to send checks I might be willing to move. How many people do you actually pay to live in the boonies?
I am a little frustrated with the federal government now supporting failed cities with my (and millions of others) tax dollars. It's nice that someone like you is trying to off-set the mistreatment.
I don't see the need to be a city dweller... to live car free. Actually rural areas most often cram all the things needed for modern life in the small town. Generally a gas station, hardware, grocery, restaurants, church's, post office, library, community center, doctor, fire station/EMT... and so forth... all within easy walking distance.
Rural living might be a better choice for those who desire simpler living.
I am a little frustrated with the federal government now supporting failed cities with my (and millions of others) tax dollars. It's nice that someone like you is trying to off-set the mistreatment.
I don't see the need to be a city dweller... to live car free. Actually rural areas most often cram all the things needed for modern life in the small town. Generally a gas station, hardware, grocery, restaurants, church's, post office, library, community center, doctor, fire station/EMT... and so forth... all within easy walking distance.
Rural living might be a better choice for those who desire simpler living.
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
I agree completely! If by "we're" you mean the bulk of society. The ancient technologies of wind, sun, plant, animal, and human forms of power still work very well. Technophobia... will always influence a portion of society. And some will always be looking for ways to retreat. Some believe: As technologies become increasingly complex and difficult to understand, people are more likely to harbor anxieties relating to their use of modern technologies.
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
Oh no, no, no.... I think you believe that... but those ideas are false. Rural areas have been subsidizing cities for a few years now.
#64
Senior Member
I don't doubt it (I don't know it either, I'm just ignorant), but I also know all of us are subsidizing farming. I'm not worried about it. Subsidizing each other is incredibly useful.
#65
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Why shouldn't those of us who are enthusiastic about it discuss the merits of this way of life, especially in a sub-forum that was set up precisely for that purpose? Is the car-centric lifestyle beyond reproach for some reason? Is this your only sacred cow or are there other topics we're supposed to keep quiet about so as not to offend your sensibilities?
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,403
Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Thanks just the same, but I think I'll go right on advocating (or "preaching", as you call it), whether you like it or not. If you disagree with something I say, please tell me why I'm wrong, but don't try to silence me.
#69
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thats fine. Nobody has to advocate if they don't want to. Still, the next time you're riding on a bike lane or cycle path, at least be aware that that facility didn't just magically appear, and it wasn't installed due to some government's unsolicited generosity.
Every facility was installed because some cyclists advocated to get it put in there. Somebody did the grunt work of going to meetings, raising money, doing media campaign legwork, or at least writing a small check to help defray expenses. I'm guessing that somebody wasn't you?
Every facility was installed because some cyclists advocated to get it put in there. Somebody did the grunt work of going to meetings, raising money, doing media campaign legwork, or at least writing a small check to help defray expenses. I'm guessing that somebody wasn't you?
Face it, if you want more people to experiment/embrace LCF, then focus on the positives and the not the negatives. Reason being is that LCF is a minor subset of cyclists in general, which in turn is still a minority in the States. By attacking the car, you are also attacking to some extent those non-LCF cyclists.
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
You're going back to the 1950's to get those ideas. Farmers aren't subsidized. There was that stupid alcohol subsidize thingy.... which created a new industry and wasted a bunch of federal dollars. But very few ended up in farmers pockets. But... none of this has anything to do with the OP topic... I am out.
#71
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
How convenient for proponents of the status quo! Anyone speaking out in favor of car-free living is "preaching" and should shut up (or be censored?), while motoring advocates should feel free to praise to high heavens the wonders of the motor car. Does "GetOuttaMyWay" describe your driving style, your attitude toward those you disagree with or both?
2. My wife picked the username. Probably because I'm always telling those that are more interested in that smartphone in their hands than paying attention to the flow of traffic around them, whether I'm on the bike, on foot, or in the car. The name might also have something to do with what I tell my own kids when the dinner bell is rung
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 83 Times
in
44 Posts
You're going back to the 1950's to get those ideas. Farmers aren't subsidized. There was that stupid alcohol subsidize thingy.... which created a new industry and wasted a bunch of federal dollars. But very few ended up in farmers pockets. But... none of this has anything to do with the OP topic... I am out.
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,403
Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
2. My wife picked the username. Probably because I'm always telling those that are more interested in that smartphone in their hands than paying attention to the flow of traffic around them, whether I'm on the bike, on foot, or in the car. The name might also have something to do with what I tell my own kids when the dinner bell is rung
#75
Senior Member
You're going back to the 1950's to get those ideas. Farmers aren't subsidized. There was that stupid alcohol subsidize thingy.... which created a new industry and wasted a bunch of federal dollars. But very few ended up in farmers pockets. But... none of this has anything to do with the OP topic... I am out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricul...#United_States
"The United States currently pays around $20 billion per year to farmers in direct subsidies as 'farm income stabilization'."