What do I mean by this?
It's been the sentiment of urban residents, whether they're suburban or rural transplants, that it's a dream to not own a car because they can use public transportation in the form of busses and trains; and that the city they currently live in is walkable. But then something happened in the past five years or so.
These urban residents went to salivating over public transportation to bikes. If you listen carefully to their rhetoric they tend to focus on their preferred method of transportation versus their disdain for cars. Little mention to trains and busses.
The "save mother Gaia" movement is a weird one. Many liked not owning a car because it saved them money and it helped reduce their carbon footprint. This is all good and I agree that not owning a car brings a certain type of freedom (you're not beholden to car maintenance, car insurance, gas prices, finding parking or paying for parking), but then they turned to electric cars to help further reduce air pollution. You'd think they'd be pleased by this. They were - sorta.
Now I do agree that it's totally possible for each city in the US and its suburbs to become bike-friendly. I think the US would greatly benefit from it as a society.
You see, it's not just busses and trains are provided, but that cars become electric. As the Go Green movement marched forward certain people like the Mayor of Emeryville - John Bauters - outright admits that he wants to deemphasize the use of cars despite his city being relatively car centric and to move to an "bike centric" city mindset. Even his public bio states that he's an enthusiastic bicyclist. Talk about forcing your secular beliefs down people's throats. This sorta kinda comes to no surprise given Emeryville is a city right outside Oakland, California.
What's missing from this equation that there isn't much emphasis on balance. It's not enough to make cars electric - the Go Green movement ultimately wants cars to either become the minority mode of transportation even if its electric as they move society to a more European (think Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium). Sound familiar?
These people tend to be of the same mindset that want the US to adopt universal healthcare and so-called free higher education. They're the ones that use the moral relativism card in order to get their way - as with abortion and the normality of sodomy and other deviant sexual behaviors. But they turn a moral code when it comes to their own missions. Funny how that works out.
Even in some urban residents say that they sorta kinda don't want to be dependent on public transportation schedules. This is where they prefer an e-scooter or biking if the place they need to go is longer than, say, 3 miles. They like the idea and the reality of getting on their scooter or bike and to come and go as they please. I guess public transportation, to a degree, has become the new car where some want to rid themselves of it. To some degree the scooter and bikes have slowly imbued the freedom that a car gives/gave to a person - the freedom to come and go as they please, but in an urban environment.
As mentioned in the previous post, I am not opposed to America emphasizing bikes, walkability and the further investment in creating a more comprehensive and efficient bus and rail lines throughout the US. I encourage it. But the whole anti-car sentiment is a weird one given, that yes, the sense of actual freedom that makes the US unique is getting into a car and partaking in that classic American road trip that no other county is known for. In this case, I do not want to be dependent on the schedule of a train to get from LA to Boston. Flying would cover the same distance much quicker - even quicker than a bullet train. I'd rather hop in an electric car and go at my own pace. I want to stop in the middle of a deserted intersection in Utah or somewhere in Southwest America and embrace the vastness of the American landscape. On my own time. That's freedom.
No comments :
Post a Comment