First of all, a lot of this slowing down would still be required if you were the only cyclist in Denmark - due to the dangerous positions at which you the cyclist are placed in intersections etc. Secondly, the quoted passage is something I simply disagree with. CM is meant to block the way and move people in a rather inefficient fashion. Large group rides are just that, group rides, so the group wants to stay together which means going at roughly one speed.

Again, this is not a matter of facilities but of education. Right now somehow we can arrange it so that cyclists most of the time are out of the way of the faster motorists, or at least can without that much trouble be passed by faster motorists. So let's say our facilities are regular roads, nobody drives anymore and everybody cycles. You have the same number of vehicles on the road, but they are smaller vehicles. A fast cyclist takes up a lot less space than a fast motorist, so it should be easier to ensure that this cyclist has some passing room. It just comes down to the fact that cyclists are not accustomed to following rules and as long as they are not out on the road where they are forced to take some measures not to block the path completely, they will block it because they can.

Look at it this way: suppose you have a large crowd waiting to enter a building through one door. You open the door and what do you get? Instant gridlock. The crowd has clogged the doors. Now suppose instead a group of soldiers has to get in. Suddenly there is no gridlock - it takes everyone one hassle-free minute instead of fifteen nerve-wracking and physically unpleasant minutes to enter the building. I'm not advocating for turning the society into a military one ; this just goes to show that an orderly system works miracles.

Right now, the cycling facilities in North America (especially segregated ones) are a completely disorderly mess. People feel completely entitled to block the entire path while crawling at 5 mph, to make sudden unannounced moves etc. No wonder the paths get clogged up, and no argument - any facility will get clogged up with this style of usage. But if it is mostly possible to move much larger objects on existing facilities without complete gridlock, why should it be impossible to move much smaller objects through the same system and accommodate a wide range of speed that is already accommodated there right now?

Wouldn't it be rather easy to, say, restripe our regular roads with narrower lanes so they fit bikes, and designate some as fast lanes... perhaps even enforce a minimum speed limit in those particular lanes? You can even make right lanes wide to allow a family of four with two toddlers on trikes to ride in a quadruple file. These lanes can even be raised (sidewalks, here we go again - but that's what you want, no?)

I don't know why you think this is my mindset. Drivers are restricted from racing through downtown and residential streets not so much by other drivers as by a system that deliberately intends to restrict high speeds because high speeds are dangerous. Allowing people to do 55 mph in places where there is a high concentration of pedestrians is dangerous and ruins the community. Allowing them to go 25 is not and does not. This does not depend on type of vehicle or the maximum speed the vehicle is capable of developing. If the fastest speed I'm capable of developing on my bike still falls within a safe range, I don't think restricting it just because it's my maximum speed is a good reason. If my fastest speed is actually unsafe (e.g. on some wicked downhill) - restrict away.