this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2024
394 points (95.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

9622 readers
605 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

I love cyclists. Always let them go first.

I just hate the bike racing people who think public traffic is their personal sporting grounds. Meaning they don't have to follow the rules of the road because it might mean they don't get to break their speed record that day. Or that close down entire roads just so they can race one another.

They should find a hobby that isn't in public traffic. Imagine if tennis closed down train tracks just so they can use the train tracks to put up their net.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

they find the concept of the do-gooder infuriating and the idea of minding their own business untenable.

Indeed!

[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 months ago

The truth? It stems from fear based mentality and personal insecurity. If you spend enough time evaluating the conservative mindset you come to realize it is grounded in fear and a disdain for oneself. They don't want more cyclists because they think it's an affront to them personally, as if they would need to start cycling to fit in.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago (7 children)

It’s pretty much just rural vs urban divide.

Bikes don’t work well in rural or suburban communities and so if you are for it, then you are one of the “urban liberals” and so I must oppose you at all costs.

Of course there are also urban conservatives that are against cycling but we have a name for those, ~~idiots~~ people with a financial interest in the current car centric infrastructure

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Bikes don’t work well in rural or suburban communities

It can work to an extent in some of those places too, it's just the infrastructure and sprawl has gotten so bad. Small towns in Europe often have quite good cycling infrastructure and public transport, for example.

But I agree with your overall point that the culture and politics of surburban/exurban/rural areas are a big part of it (along with the history that drove people from the cities to these areas in the first place).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

The major problem against cycling for rural/suburban, people have a commute that makes cycling impossible. I happen to work in the same small town that I live in but I still can only bike to work during the summers when the kids are out of school and my wife is home.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

I’m wokerati! But no shit, we’re doing what the left wants, so of course the right is mad. It doesn’t matter if it’s for our health, cheap transit, or the environment or any other reason we aren’t guzzling oil to get somewhere and so they’re mad

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

The same reason they fight against vegetarians, the same reason they fight against gay men, the same reason they fight against renewable energy, all of it is toxic masculinity. The standardized male eats steaks, drives a loud truck, works at the coal plant, complains about his wife, enjoys smoking and drinking and watching sports. If you deviate from this whatsoever, conservatives are against you.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

There's a couple of things at play here:

Where the infra (say it's the road) isn't adequately engineered to accommodate cycling and driving at the same time, it's going to give drivers the experience that the road is a scarce resource and when resources are scarce, some folks are going to think in eliminationist terms (e.g. if those people just didn't exist, everything would be fine) or the part of their brains that descends from people that wiped out competing clans and took their resources rules the moment and they set about violently defending 'their' resources.

The folks most-triggered at being made to share the road with cyclists really do some mental gymnastics to frame it in a way that they're really the victims here and it's cyclists, not the road engineering, that are the problem. Oh, poor me those cyclists don't pay taxes and I subsidize their use of my roads bla bla bla and eventually that comes out in the form of vehicular assault to teach cyclists a lesson to stay off their roads. It's bullshit all the way down of course, but that way they get to feel like the good guys while still bullying and murdering cyclists.

Also, it's not by accident that the 'everything is woke' people are the first to engage in whatever moral panic that's directing political violence at today's boogeyman- whether it's trans people in bathrooms, or gay people generally, or pregnant women that have ideas about bodily autonomy, their targets are always a tiny vulnerable demographic and uniting to put them in their place is an exercise in maintaining or restoring what they think order ought to look like. If they're not putting people into the bottom rung of whatever hierarchy they think they're defending, probably they think it's the end of order or civilization or the like and they've failed in their duties to uphold order. Keeping them agitated about (and acting out about) moral panics is an effective way for lobby groups to pit people against scapegoats to keep their ire focused away from themselves or their patrons.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Your second and third paragraph neatly provide one of the best explanations I’ve seen for what people mean when we call the modern right wing fascists. They see people violating the order as they’ve decided it is and are encouraged to respond with vehicular homicide

[–] [email protected] 37 points 7 months ago (6 children)

I am so tired of the "everything I don't like is woke" crowd. How long did it take for the "everything I don't like is communist/socialist" crowd to be publicly ridiculed for having such juvenile worldviews?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago

How long did it take for the “everything I don’t like is communist/socialist” crowd to be publicly ridiculed

They must be getting the last laugh because they are still around that's why we [as in US] can't have good health insurance.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago

Okay I am going to play a devil's advocate here. So of you are not wrong. Many of these people are lashing out at charge unnecessarily, though I do think it is important to look at why. First the politicians and talking head that are driving this are just trying to make hay out of non issues for their own personal agendas. Fuck them they are toxic, but why are there so many common people so willing to buy in. Simply because they are scared of losing their way of life and ability to support themselves. I don't mean losing the "right" to drive giant trucks, but losing what their parents and grandparents had. These people have seen it with the loss of good quality blue collar work. The work their parents and grandparents had, which one person could support a family and buy a house with. They have seen how the loss of manufacturing, steel, lumber, etc. jobs have affected others and they are scared that they are next.

They have the exact same existential dread of the future that the rest of have and or more or less the same reasons, they are just reacting in a different way. Just like how some people react to the loss of a family member with sadness and some with anger.

Hard right politicians have found that they can swing some of these people to their extreme views by capitalizing on this fear and offering a solution. Obviously isolationism and hate are not good longer term solutions, but they sadly do work well in the short term. I firmly believe many people that are just kind of going along with the hard right are only there because see no other solution being offered to their problems. Remember many Germans were not Nazis but they let the Nazis take power not because they agreed with them, but because no one offered anything else. Yes it is a lie but it is very important to remember why the lie exists. Sadly ignoring or dismissing it will not make things better.

I genuinely wish I had a solution, but I don't maybe smarter people than me do.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The “everything I don’t like is communist/socialist” crowd has never been ridiculed, what the hell are you thinking?

It is LITERALLY the American hegemonic ideal.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

It has in other countries

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

How long did it take for the "everything I don't like is communist/socialist" crowd to be publicly ridiculed for having such juvenile worldviews?

well, looking at McCarthyism... too long

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

Oil industry profits and exceptionalism.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I have a hypothesis about the right. Some of what happens is to protect the ego.

Consider bike riding. Riding a bike is better for the environment and their health. This prompts questions like "why am I not being better for the environment? Why am I not being better for my health?"

One option when faced with that sort of uncomfortable question is to reject thinking about it and get mad at other people. Do not consider anything negative about oneself. That's uncomfortable and difficult. Being mad about other people is easy.

This resolves the cognitive dissonance, though in its own expensive way with its own tradeoffs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You’re overthinking this. I mean, you’re right in general, but I have a hard time believing all this is going through their heads when they see a cyclist.

I think it’s just different. Conservatives dn’ t like seeing change or difference. Clearly only cars should be on the road, and everything else is change, different, an affront to the “rules”

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Exactly, and it should be noted they also never consider the other reasons to bike. Health and environment are part of why I want my city bikable, but mostly it’s because I enjoy biking more than any other mode of getting around. It makes me happy to be on my bicycle and getting to use it to get groceries turns a chore into a delight. Even if I had a perfectly clean and safe automobile and perfect health I’d still choose to bike to the grocery store when I can because fun.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Yes, a friend clued me in years ago that the key to understanding the conservative mindset is their deep shame and self-hatred. A lot of people say it's fear, but that's only partly true. Everybody is motivated by fear; liberals just fear other things.

But for conservatives, it's fear that they're worthless and inferior. That's why so much of their ideology concerns groups that they denigrate and oppress in order to feel superior. This is why they have bicyclists in their crosshairs recently.

And not just bicyclists. It's not enough just to have a car. Oh no! They have to have a truck. And not just a truck, but a grotesquely enormous truck, with a grill that juts 6 feet straight into the air, perhaps with a lift kit, too. That way, they can roll coal on and intimidate drivers of smaller, weaker vehicles, like Prius drivers.

It's a performative doubling-down on the behavior that they subconsciously feel others are judging them for, in order to redirect the shame and self-hatred outward as anger at others.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Followed by the culture of you aren't a real man if you don't go into debt to drive a massive truck which the bed will be empty 99% of the time and you can barely afford to put gas in it (but its the carbon tax bankrupting them they'll claim).

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I drive a Prius and can confirm. Large trucks act threatened by my existence on a regular basis.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

It soundy similar to how some straight people act as though homosexual people are a threat to their particular sexuality. Of course we all know that they are 0% correct, unless, unless... you think you should be examining your own sexuality? Like maybe you suspect there is something that could be awakened there...?

Then the lashing out makes sense.


Also patriarchy and control, but it can be multiple things.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

Fearing change.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 7 months ago (8 children)

A lot of people miss the fact that cyclists are just people getting about the place. As for example when you hear people say, 'Oh, it's only middle-class men who cycle, so why should we build bike lanes?' as though it's somehow the case that middle class men who choose to cycle just like... deserve to die? It's a really common argument that people make and they've not even thought about the obvious implication of what they're saying.

Even if it were true that all or most cyclists were middle-class and male, which it isn't, I'm never sure whether it's the maleness, the middle-classness, or the cycling that has apparently warranted the death sentence.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The same argument is used to attack veganism, even though the diet aspect of it is cheaper (as long as most meat imitations are avoided, although those will get cheap too in the long run).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I've read that vegetarianism is cheaper than meat-eating, but veganism is more expensive, but I'm sure you're right that it depends on what exactly you eat! In any case, it's quite an odd argument for anti-vegans to make: 'You can afford to do something good and that's why you shouldn't'?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

When i was a vegan my main protien sources was beans and chickpeas which are way cheaper than cheese and eggs, which are common vegetarian protiens.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Making it seem like it's predominately something done by middle-class men, or even rich people, helps to undermine public support for it because of the image people have of a stereotypical male cyclist, ie a well-off person riding a $1400 bike with a bunch of lycra clothes and tech gear pretending they're training for the Tour de France while they go through their midlife crisis. It's much less relatable an image for many people, who might say "Well, why do they need to ride on all the roads? They can just go on the paths in the park, or if they have so much money, they can go to a purpose-built facility."

If you frame it as though it's just going to benefit a bunch of people perceived to be living it up, you can drum up opposition from poor people, who don't want their taxes going to fund some BS project that only benefits people who are already doing alright. Your aunt that's busting her back trying to make ends meet and is trying to get back and forth to work and the shops on a bike one step up from a Wal-mart special can be much more relatable for many people who are struggling to keep up, can't really afford their car payment and might even use a bike if there were dedicated bike lanes. So people looking to discourage building out bike infrastructure will naturally prefer that everyone thinks the only ones who would benefit from these developments would be some middle-manager who owns his home, rides a bike that costs more than your rent and that has gone on more vacations in the last year than you have in the last two decades.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

You're absolutely right! As a middle-class man who cycles and just doesn't want to die, I still find it very annoying.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›