In Search of the 'War on Motorists'

[yello]

I think that would be more populist than democratic.

Arguably no difference. Is populist simply democracy in action? (devil's advocate mode again btw)

I bet if you asked car drivers if they want safer, cleaner environments and less congestion on the roads, they'd be all for it. In a vote, even they might choose to support such things.

And if it meant curtailing their car usage?

it's not necessarily democratic if the (public) transport infrastructure is appalling and expensive; it may just be more prudent to use one's car, even if one wanted to use public transport out of a sense of civic or environmental duty.

Absolutely! Agree 100%. There has to be a viable alternative. It's otherwise somewhat of a moot point.

Again, I know what I think but I know equally that my circumstances are clearly not everyone's. And I know equally that I have 'just popped out' in the car to get something when I could have taken my bike. E.g. in the midst of plumbing the bathroom, I need a bit to finish the job so I take in the car and drive the 10km to the shop to get it. There and back within 30 minutes but it's an easily do-able journey on the bike. Okay, not an everyday occurrence but I'm as guilty as anyone when it comes down to it so it'd be hypocritical of me to take too severe a stance.

 

[DrSquirrel]

And if it meant curtailing their car usage?

I think that's the point - everyone wants a cleaner environment etc, but no one wants to be the one to change.

 

[yello]

It was certainly my point!

 

[Adasta]

Populism and Democracy are not the same (or, at least, not in Democracy's purest form!) since Democracy is rigidly representative (from the bottom up, so to speak) while Populism is controlling/influencing large swathes of people through demagogy (from the top down). Now, if you want to contest if that's the way it is in contemporary society, that's a different story...

The key here is prudent and reasonable driving. I don't think many people would mind if cars were full of people, or even if they had 2 people in them, for some of their journeys. It's the one-track mindset that is the damaging aspect of this since, as has been previously mentioned, the attitude is one which valourises the car above everything.

On a semi-related note, I find it odd how capital cities such as Rome and Madrid, despite being in countries with a rich cycling tradition, do much less than TFL/London do to encourage people to use their bikes...

 

[Ergates]

What most car owners fail to acknowledge is that driving is absolutely a lifestyle choice. They arrange their lives around the amenity of car ownership and then claim necessity.

Whilst that is true it a lot of cases, it's not the case for everyone.
A very large number of people live in areas where there is no decent public transport. What should these people do? Move? All of them? Where will they live? There are also large numbers of people who work in places where there is no practical public transport option. Should they all quit their jobs?.

It's a little like saying "Unemployment is a lifestyle choice", which is fine until you realise there are more people than jobs.

 

[yello]

I didn't realise 'populist' had a capital p and was an -ism! I wasn't using the word in any academic context, I was using it in a kind of 'voting with their feet' (or should that be steering wheel!) way.

 

[ufkacbln]

But, yes, imho "war on motorists" is populist headline grabbing stuff. I don't believe such a thing exists despite it striking a chord with many.

The war on motorists is self inflicted!

Its a bit like getting a bunch of like minded mates, arming yourselves and invading another country. You then bleat that they have resisted your invasion and (quelle surpris) fired back at you.

Don't park like a moron, don't speed or use a mobile phone when driving and there is no "war"

 

[ufkacbln]

Whilst that is true it a lot of cases, it's not the case for everyone.
A very large number of people live in areas where there is no decent public transport. What should these people do? Move? All of them? Where will they live? There are also large numbers of people who work in places where there is no practical public transport option. Should they all quit their jobs?.

It's a little like saying "Unemployment is a lifestyle choice", which is fine until you realise there are more people than jobs.

Unfortunately this attitude is the exact problem.... the elderly, disabled and most families in both inner city and more importantly rural areas have no access to a vehicle. Something like 60 - 70% have no access to a vehicle.

They can't afford to drive or the car that they do own is with the main earner in a car park.

To paraphrase your question:

What should these people do?
Move?
All of them?
Where will they live?
Should they all quit their homes and relatives to move into areas where there is public transport?

.. or should we be ensuring that they have the transport system to allow them to remain where they are?

If "public transpot is not viable" means we should support car use, then surely there is an equal argument that "car use is not viable" means we should support public transport?

 

[Alant]

I am probably an oddball here by the sound of things.

I usually commute to work on my bike, I regularly ride 20+ miles on a saturday and sunday morning, and have recently taken days of work to complete 50 and 60 milers.

Up until last year when the cycling bug really caught hold I would always have said that "cars" were my main hobby, and until this time I had a kit car in the garage, that I had built myself, as I have done previously.

I still enjoy driving simply for the pleasure of being in a nice car, I took the brother in laws Porsche out for a spin at the weekend, we have a large family car and my car is a BMW Z4, so when I still had the kit car we had three cars.

I have never categorised people by the cars they drive, or whether they drive a car or ride a bike, and I don't intend whipping myself because I get pleasure from driving

In respect of a number of the comments about short car journeys a simple point for me is, from my experience of cycling, would I want my wife to cycle, or walk, on the roads around here, on journeys under 5 miles, something which she is perfectly capable of doing as one of her hobbies is hiking and she regularly does around 15 miles, the answer to which is no way it's not safe.

Would I want her to do this if there were adequate / safe cycle routes - yes I would.

Do I think that anyone is going to put new cycle routes in around ours and the adjoining villages, no

 

[al78]

Who is determining public v private interests? The 'cost to society', Whose freedoms does he see as being impacted by other's freedoms? Surely all actions impact on others?

Yes, that is what social responsibility is all about, thinking about the impact of your lifestyle choices on other people and trying to reduce the destructive side effects.

I would suspect that societies that have high social responsibility have a better quality of life (taking other factors into account), than very individualistic societies.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I beleive "The War on the Motorist" can be found in the fiction section alongside the slim volume "We are all in this together"

 

[DrSquirrel]

The war on motorists is self inflicted!

Its a bit like getting a bunch of like minded mates, arming yourselves and invading another country. You then bleat that they have resisted your invasion and (quelle surpris) fired back at you.

Don't park like a moron, don't speed or use a mobile phone when driving and there is no "war"

"War against serial killers"

oh noes

 

[HJ]

But, yes, imho "war on motorists" is populist headline grabbing stuff. I don't believe such a thing exists despite it striking a chord with many.

It would appear that The Economist aggrees with you, the chart showing changes in the real cost of transport over the last twenty years, is also very informative...

 

[Ergates]

.. or should we be ensuring that they have the transport system to allow them to remain where they are?

If "public transpot is not viable" means we should support car use, then surely there is an equal argument that "car use is not viable" means we should support public transport?

Absolutely - I'm not arguing for a second that we should support car use over public transport. I'm arguing that, at this point in time, there are a lot of people for whom public transport isn't a realistic option. It should be, but isn't.

To put it another way: Any one of us could change to living car free, but not every one of us.

 

[Sheffield_Tiger]

It's one of Monbiot's better articles...

That's coming from someone who, years ago, once caused a "stir" in the FIN Free Information network dominated by the Greens, Charter88 and the like, by publishing a double-barrelled "Sally Skull (Class War)"-esque attack on the pompous fool. After the lunch-out hippies had just not got around to doing anything for the issue, I pretty much self-published one, and we never had so full a mailbox, full of shock and "how dare you" for daring to blaspheme against Pope George

It's easy to write haughty words and I find Monbiot annoying, he does come across as preaching down from his priviledged position and out of touch with a vast proporton of the country. Whatever he writes is NOT going to reach the breadline dad-of-too-many driving a wangled motability people carrier for all his kids, obtained under his auntie's name. He isn't even going to see Monbiot's words let alone give time to reading them should he happen upon them