The global temperance movement is an excellent example of how a small, vocal, organized, minority was able to leverage moral or political correctness to inflict their social change agenda on a complacent, shamed, majority. The ideals of the agenda countered human nature, were not integrated by the majority, and laws were reversed after high social costs. Similar agendas and methods to inflict social change exist today.
A global temperance movement of sorts now demands another hydrocarbon be renounced, gasoline! This minority of activists are political, ideological, and religious in fervor. They base their fight on many fronts: gasoline is bad for the health – walking and bicycling are healthier transport modes; burning hydrocarbons increases global warming and hastens The Rapture; bicycles are chariots of the gods; shared vehicle lanes shall be made bike-only lanes nationally. Instead of organizing in churches, the new temperance army congregates on the Internet, bike shops, and bike rides! The self righteousness of New Urbanists and bicycle activists equals that of teetotalers a century ago. Dismantling of prohibition laws when the minority movement faded hopefully will be echoed in costly returning of roadways to motorists once the cycling fad has again waned.
This entry seems a little indulgent for someone who goes on about logic. I don’t think that incorporating safe space for cyclists really on par with prohibition.
But there definitely is a reaction taking place to increased congestion. And in some cases it has nothing to do with more bicycles, so much as it has to do with not having room for more cars.Some European cities are implementing tolls to get into large cities, simply because there isn’t room for more roadway, and at a certain point, enough is enough. You make a valid point about policies failing after doing so much damage… But I fail to see how it makes more sense to try to make more room to let more cars pile into a city that hasn’t gotten any bigger geographically, and doesn’t have space to widen streets to make room for more traffic.
I’m not arguing that petroleum use should be curtailed. But if you really want/need to fit a larger number of people into the same number of square miles, comfortably, then maybe finding a way to let them leave their cars at home is a good place to start, if you’re really worried about easing traffic.
Thanks for your comments.
1. Car or bicycle is constrained thought. Motorbikes offer most of the bicycle advantages plus greater distances, higher speeds, and passenger accommodation. Automatic transmission that Americans love, even! Mopeds, scooters, and full motorcycles represent a spectrum of options for urban, rural, and between environments. Yamaha, for example, has many models that get over 100mpg – 132mph even for a clean burning, fuel injected, four stroke, 49cc scooter that Massachusetts law permits on bicycle lanes as a moped. Motorbikes are very popular in southern Europe, India, China, Brazil, southeast Asia, and elsewhere in developing countries.
Motorbikes are so popular in China that the types there without pollution controls worsened urban air quality to the extent that their use is banned in some cites. The result is a huge boom in electric scooters and China’s world dominance in the production and use of that technology.
2. I wrote about hydrocarbon abstinence in summer. In winter I’ve noticed a double standard. Pedal pushers have not yet renounced burning of hydrocarbons to keep warm in homes and offices.