Violence is wrong, but anti-carism is the one political cause that somehow makes me irrationally angry (which then might explain why others get violent)
I was racking my brain for over 15 years why it is the case and basically found this:
1) if they want me to take the bus, they want to take my independence away from me and to rely on a service provided by others, being carried like cargo, at the mercy of a system that is not in my control, they literally want to take control away from me
2) if they want me to walk or bike - the more common case - they want me to live in their stupid city, which I loathe, and I only commute there because that is where the jobs are, and I would not otherwise leave the suburbia or agglomeration, ever
so this explains car brain I think, both kinds of anti-carism are extremely callous and insulting, either to deny independence, or wanting people who have no choice but work in the city to actually live there
Firstly, thank you for reading and engaging with something you disagree with!
I think the difference here is that you're imagining *your* car being taken away but the system otherwise remaining unchanged. In that case you're right - in a car-dependent system, using other forms of transport is difficult.
But if you go one step further and imagine *all* the cars being taken away, suddenly the picture is different. Buses and trams will be faster and more reliable because they're not stuck in a car jam. Cycling becomes viable over longer distances and for vulnerable people because there's no longer the stress and danger caused by cars.
Even in the suburbs, it's possible to imagine a world where you can take the children to school by bicycle and then get on a train to work. It would be both quicker and more pleasant than driving. But at the moment it's difficult because of other people in cars.
it still does not reduce the dependency on services, in case of public transport. bikes are viable for some people and perhaps for them could be for longer distances, I cannot think it can work for the majority, being exposed to the weather, the suits we wear for the hope of promotion get soaked with rain or sweat and so on. besides the reason the car is so important for independence is that it is a moving house with walls that separate us from other people.
Violence is wrong, but anti-carism is the one political cause that somehow makes me irrationally angry (which then might explain why others get violent)
I was racking my brain for over 15 years why it is the case and basically found this:
1) if they want me to take the bus, they want to take my independence away from me and to rely on a service provided by others, being carried like cargo, at the mercy of a system that is not in my control, they literally want to take control away from me
2) if they want me to walk or bike - the more common case - they want me to live in their stupid city, which I loathe, and I only commute there because that is where the jobs are, and I would not otherwise leave the suburbia or agglomeration, ever
so this explains car brain I think, both kinds of anti-carism are extremely callous and insulting, either to deny independence, or wanting people who have no choice but work in the city to actually live there
Firstly, thank you for reading and engaging with something you disagree with!
I think the difference here is that you're imagining *your* car being taken away but the system otherwise remaining unchanged. In that case you're right - in a car-dependent system, using other forms of transport is difficult.
But if you go one step further and imagine *all* the cars being taken away, suddenly the picture is different. Buses and trams will be faster and more reliable because they're not stuck in a car jam. Cycling becomes viable over longer distances and for vulnerable people because there's no longer the stress and danger caused by cars.
Even in the suburbs, it's possible to imagine a world where you can take the children to school by bicycle and then get on a train to work. It would be both quicker and more pleasant than driving. But at the moment it's difficult because of other people in cars.
it still does not reduce the dependency on services, in case of public transport. bikes are viable for some people and perhaps for them could be for longer distances, I cannot think it can work for the majority, being exposed to the weather, the suits we wear for the hope of promotion get soaked with rain or sweat and so on. besides the reason the car is so important for independence is that it is a moving house with walls that separate us from other people.
For once, I find myself nodding violently in agreement, Sam ;-) Seriously, especially this bit:
"Being a car driver means routinely being thanked by members of the public simply for obeying the law."
As I, too, peel back the layers of car brain, I have mostly stopped giving that little wave.
Wonders never cease! Everyone agrees with me on something, eventually - a product of my very weird blend of views.