Why be dismissive of the cyclist activists? American culture revolves around the car, with cities designed accordingly, unlike European ones. It IS revolutionary to ride a bike in the US, it goes totally against the norm. European cyclists can take it for granted that they have “collective freedom and power”.
Right. Americans were/are basically forced to drive due to land use regulatory policy which creates car dependency. Also several European nations used to be quite car dependant before priorities changed, like the Netherlands.
I lived in America for 39 years, never owned or driven a car (and still haven't at 47). Never would have had the money to own a car even had I wanted to. In other words, it's hardly a revolutionary choice not to buy something you don't need.
Yeah, I agree and also thought the take was awkwardly dismissive. Activists are working to try and implement positive changes that happen to already exist in other countries, but because these other countries already enjoy these arrangements we should be dismissive of other's efforts to try and achieve them as well?
Again, I’ve never driven a car in my life and can’t understand for the life of me why anyone thinks they’re necessary.
The larger point is that there’s nothing revolutionary about not driving. Not driving was literally the default of the entire world up to the early 1900s and is still the default of the most people in the world.
A parallel would be someone thinking that not having a smart phone, a yacht, or a gun is a revolutionary act.
Understood. The response just seems glib--like unnecessarily shitting on people for wanting a more common-sense society that, yes, already exist in other places. I don't think anyone really considers that revolutionary.
Unfortunately, at the time of that conversation (some 15 years ago), we both absolutely did know activists who thought it was revolutionary.
Local struggle is absolutely important. But again, the anglo-American activist tendency is still to universalize their local struggles to the rest of the world.
I would agree with you that not owning a car is not “revolutionary”- if it were, it would be a revolution led but people with one DUI too many.
But, I also think it’s a bit off to not see why anyone thinks a car is necessary. When you lived in the US, you were a childless adult. And as I understand it (which might be inaccurately) you spent much of that time in a place where it rains more than snows. An area that also has some form of public transportation, however poor it is.
If you have a kid, you end up with the material handling issues of family-sized packages of groceries and diapers, not to mention having a kid to transport around. And you end up having a perspective shift. Having a kid makes you responsible for protecting a fragile being. I saw some many kid in bike trailers in Portland, OR weaving in and out of traffic and sitting at exhaust height beside idling cars. Even then, I don’t think I would have done that with my kid. Since COVID, American drivers have become much, much more aggressive. I live near an Amish community that now has a problem with aggressive drivers running buggies off the road- including buggies full of little kids going to school. As absurd as it is, Americans can now reasonably claim to need a vehicle more substantial than a buggy or a bike to protect ourselves from each other.
And of course, there was always a much greater utility for cars in areas where substantial and long-term snowfall and cold increase road hazards and the risk of exposure to cold- hazards that childless young adult can probably handle, but which are a problem for parents or the elderly.
Healthcare is a uniquely American issue, as other Anglo nations have affordable healthcare. Interestingly same-sex nudity isn't a big deal in arab culture either, which has a long tradition of bathhouses.
A blessed Imbolc, then! Given that I'm 37 and could use some positive surprises in my life, I hope I'll be able to make good use of your magical advice.
Nietzsche got that phrase from Pindar, and in the original Greek there is a beautiful nuance that easily gets lost in translation. The Greek consists of three parts: 'May you become', 'what kind [of a person] you are', and 'learning/understanding/obtaining knowledge'. Now, the second part is in such a grammatical position that it can be subordinate to the first, the third, or both! So it could mean: Become the kind of person you are, by learning what kind of person you are.' Or: 'Become one who understands what kind of person he is.' Or: 'By understanding, become the kind of person you are'. Or ...
Why be dismissive of the cyclist activists? American culture revolves around the car, with cities designed accordingly, unlike European ones. It IS revolutionary to ride a bike in the US, it goes totally against the norm. European cyclists can take it for granted that they have “collective freedom and power”.
Right. Americans were/are basically forced to drive due to land use regulatory policy which creates car dependency. Also several European nations used to be quite car dependant before priorities changed, like the Netherlands.
I lived in America for 39 years, never owned or driven a car (and still haven't at 47). Never would have had the money to own a car even had I wanted to. In other words, it's hardly a revolutionary choice not to buy something you don't need.
Yeah, I agree and also thought the take was awkwardly dismissive. Activists are working to try and implement positive changes that happen to already exist in other countries, but because these other countries already enjoy these arrangements we should be dismissive of other's efforts to try and achieve them as well?
Again, I’ve never driven a car in my life and can’t understand for the life of me why anyone thinks they’re necessary.
The larger point is that there’s nothing revolutionary about not driving. Not driving was literally the default of the entire world up to the early 1900s and is still the default of the most people in the world.
A parallel would be someone thinking that not having a smart phone, a yacht, or a gun is a revolutionary act.
Understood. The response just seems glib--like unnecessarily shitting on people for wanting a more common-sense society that, yes, already exist in other places. I don't think anyone really considers that revolutionary.
Unfortunately, at the time of that conversation (some 15 years ago), we both absolutely did know activists who thought it was revolutionary.
Local struggle is absolutely important. But again, the anglo-American activist tendency is still to universalize their local struggles to the rest of the world.
I would agree with you that not owning a car is not “revolutionary”- if it were, it would be a revolution led but people with one DUI too many.
But, I also think it’s a bit off to not see why anyone thinks a car is necessary. When you lived in the US, you were a childless adult. And as I understand it (which might be inaccurately) you spent much of that time in a place where it rains more than snows. An area that also has some form of public transportation, however poor it is.
If you have a kid, you end up with the material handling issues of family-sized packages of groceries and diapers, not to mention having a kid to transport around. And you end up having a perspective shift. Having a kid makes you responsible for protecting a fragile being. I saw some many kid in bike trailers in Portland, OR weaving in and out of traffic and sitting at exhaust height beside idling cars. Even then, I don’t think I would have done that with my kid. Since COVID, American drivers have become much, much more aggressive. I live near an Amish community that now has a problem with aggressive drivers running buggies off the road- including buggies full of little kids going to school. As absurd as it is, Americans can now reasonably claim to need a vehicle more substantial than a buggy or a bike to protect ourselves from each other.
And of course, there was always a much greater utility for cars in areas where substantial and long-term snowfall and cold increase road hazards and the risk of exposure to cold- hazards that childless young adult can probably handle, but which are a problem for parents or the elderly.
Healthcare is a uniquely American issue, as other Anglo nations have affordable healthcare. Interestingly same-sex nudity isn't a big deal in arab culture either, which has a long tradition of bathhouses.
Your body. real leftism, political social comments brought this more than a century old "leftist" poem to mind. "Bred and Roses"
As we go marching, marching, in the beauty of the day,
A million darkened kitchens, a thousand mill lofts gray,
Are touched with all the radiance that a sudden sun discloses,
For the people hear us singing: Bread and Roses! Bread and Roses!
As we go marching, marching, we battle too for men,
For they are women's children, and we mother them agaiOur lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses.
As we go marching, marching, unnumbered women dead
Go crying through our singing their ancient call for bread.
Small art and love and beauty their drudging spirits knew.
Yes, it is bread we fight for, but we fight for roses too.
As we go marching, marching, we bring the greater days,
The rising of the women means the rising of the race.
No more the drudge and idler, ten that toil where one reposes,
But a sharing of life's glories: Bread and roses, bread and roses.
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; bread and roses, bread and roses.
A blessed Imbolc, then! Given that I'm 37 and could use some positive surprises in my life, I hope I'll be able to make good use of your magical advice.
Nietzsche got that phrase from Pindar, and in the original Greek there is a beautiful nuance that easily gets lost in translation. The Greek consists of three parts: 'May you become', 'what kind [of a person] you are', and 'learning/understanding/obtaining knowledge'. Now, the second part is in such a grammatical position that it can be subordinate to the first, the third, or both! So it could mean: Become the kind of person you are, by learning what kind of person you are.' Or: 'Become one who understands what kind of person he is.' Or: 'By understanding, become the kind of person you are'. Or ...