I don't get the point of this post.
Bicycles don't need special "facilities", the roads are already here.
I've ridden in Critical Mass with hundreds of people, and I've ridden with hundreds of Chinese commuters in China - everyone gets used to it and learns how to ride in large groups. No big deal.
If you try to commute by bike in a city where almost no one rides bike (like Atlanta or Houston), car drivers either don't see you, don't know how to react to you, or are outright hostile. If you ride in a city like San Francisco, where there are a lot of bike commuters, car drivers tend to be more polite and accommodating. Also, the large number of bicyclists allows a group like the SFBC to be a political force for making cycling easier and safer.
Of course replacing cars with bikes won't solve the world's environmental problems, but it is a step in the right direction. Actually, unless we replace our economic system with something better, all the green consumerism in the world won't stop the coming ecological meltdown. It will just slow it down a little. But in the meantime, if more people rode bikes, the air would be cleaner, fewer people would be killed in car accidents, people would be healthier, cities would become more interesting, etc., etc.
Seems like your whole point is the opposite of what most car free advocates are about. You want to be the only cyclist in town so you can play bike ninja, while most of the rest of us are considering our impact on the world and what would be better for everyone.