this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
13 points (78.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

9629 readers
325 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
ConfidentLonely
Fried_out_Kombi
[email protected]
13
[blog] how we get drivers on board (self.fuckcars)
submitted 6 months ago by mulcahey to c/fuckcars
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I genuinely believe that car owners could be tricked into supporting FuckCars policies by a very crafty politician/campaign. It would work like this:

  1. Proclaim your love of cars. Loudly. "I want to make our city the best city in the world for drivers!"
  2. "What are the biggest problems drivers face today? Traffic and parking! Therefore... We need to open up roads and parking spaces..."
  3. "And that's why we're going to cap the number of cars that can enter downtown. With increased public transit, we can free up these roads for drivers! That way: more parking, less traffic, a better life for drivers"

Do the same thing for bikes:

  1. "These bikers want to share the road, but studies have shown that whether you use sharrows, plastic bollards, it doesn't matter: people still get hurt.
  2. And here's the thing: when a car hits a cyclist, it's bad for everyone, including the driver. Nobody wants to hit a cyclist. But the sad truth is that it might just not be possible to share the road
  3. "That's why I'm proposing that we make some roads car-only, to protect cyclists." [Crowd of drivers cheer, and you quickly say:] "Also we'll make some streets bike-only, for the same reason." [And then when you get in office, just be like "Yeah the highway is for cars"]

I'm available for speeches if anyone's hiring

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

You don't need to target and trick drivers. Thats just a dick move. Vision Zero has much more effective methods of subversion.

Your cause hangs on the "safety" like that hang in there motivational cat poster. Yeah, no one wants anyone hurt, so we look like an ass fighting it. But the real trickery is deep in the policies where the word "safety" is redefined from what we think in our heads to align with fuck cars agendas. Safety, for my city, is absolute lowest priority, congestion as means for traffic control, blind obstructions, denied autonomy, and the absolute gem: we made collecting negative data about these changes illegal.

We unloaded both barrels into our feet before we even knew what happened. You're SOOO behind the times.