View Single Post
Old 02-14-15, 01:22 AM
  #50  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower
There's a populism culture right now in the US that is threatening cycling growth by pretending to support it via petitions, fundraising, etc. What they do is, instead of insisting on bike infrastructure as a fundamental need, they promote the idea that if enough people show enough support (via signatures, money contributions, etc.), then (and only then) will action be taken to expand the infrastructure. What this does is, by default, give power to those who fail to support cycling by counting their silence as it fails to contribute to the number of signatures or monetary contributions for these campaigns.

What is needed is an appeal to the constitutional spirit of the US. not popular sovereignty. Only once we accept that automotivism has impaired the freedom to use other modes of transportation will the ethic of freedom be invoked to require bike lanes on all roads, bike paths through motor-free areas, etc. Until then, automotivism is trying to be the default totalitarian culture by insisting that people are indeed free to choose other modes but they just don't want to.

The only reason people don't want to is because they've become conditioned to accept they only have one choice. As one friend told me, "driving is just something you do. It's not optional." I believe this is how most US residents view driving and why they view car-free reforms as futile. It's totalitarianism at the level of individual minds despite freedom and democracy at the level of governmental ideology.
You're saying that people who are trying to get more infrastructure are actually against cycling? And using democratic processes to accomplish change is actually counter-change?
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline