Ugh More Self-Righteous Bike Talk

“Ugh,” you are, at this point, almost certainly thinking. “Another self-righteous blog post about bicycles. Just what the internet needs. Great.”

By now the audience has reduced by half (at least) as the rest of those folks navigated away to go look for FailBlog videos or something with baby animals exploring playground equipment. And I get it, you’ve all heard this diatribe before, and besides cyclists are just so damn annoying. That’s really it, at the end of the day.

Just this morning I was almost pasted by some guy hopping onto the sidewalk from riding toward oncoming traffic during rush hour. What a dickhead. And if you’re still reading you obviously know that all cyclists aren’t like that guy, and obviously as that happened he and I were both passed by like 20 people texting and driving on their way to work, but damn, he almost got me.

And hell, even the good cyclists are a pain in the neck. They’re all over the roads that they don’t even pay for, zigging and zagging and carrying on. And if you can look past the film of human grease they’ve accumulated from exercising while commuting and their lewd pants you’ll probably get splashed as you pass them with inches to spare because they’re all just drenched with smug*. They’re the worst. I get it.

But what I don’t get about folks who openly hate cyclists or tacitly endorse that aggression by driving when they shouldn’t is how else they see this playing out.

Because, like, there are a lot of us, people, you know? And then every day there are a few more. And we’re all pretty much going to the same place – stores, stores, restaurants, whatever. And traffic is already pretty bad, right? That’s what I hear. So have a seat and use your imagination for a minute, really. How do you see this going?

Here’s a couple ideas for how it’s probably not going to go:

  • Magical Autonomous Subterranean Hyperloop Super Cars
    These are not going to save us. Sorry. Elon Musk and his ilk have continually shown that in driving innovation the technology industry is exceptional at creating value for shareholders, and not quite as good at solving problems that are measured by human lives, or goodness, or really anything other than currency. They are, however, pretty good at inventing problems for which they have a patent on the solution.
  • Flying Cars
    File this with with the tunnel cars.
  • Back to the Old Days
    Certainly to the chagrin of your grandfather and right-wing whackjob uncle who thinks our economy should still work like it’s 1890, things are not going to go back to the good ol’ days, when you never had to sit in traffic and a gallon of milk cost a nickle.
  • Nuclear Winter
    Shoot actually this one might just play out. And it’ll look a lot like the old days, the wild west, I guess, but you’ll pay for things with ears or teeth or something and probably eat babies, if Cormac McCarty knows anything.
  • Gradually Numbing Our Perception of What Is An Acceptable Distance to Sit in Our Cars, Isolated by Glass and Air Conditioning and Podcasts from Our Communities, as We Increasingly Sprawl and Pave the Interstices between Cities and Towns and We Find that Eventually We Have Created a Kind of Infinite Strip Mall of Mega-Box Stores and Build-a-Bears and Office Parks and Office Park Parking Lots and We Have No Choice to Meet Our Basic Needs than to Sit in a Car for 45 (60? 90!) Minutes at a Time to Simply Buy Lettuce or Something, or Even Worse it Becomes So That the Horror of Doing So is Insurmountable and So We Order Our Lettuce on the Internet and Never Feel That The Cost – Financial, Emotional, ETC – Is Worth Leaving Home and We Further Insulate Ourselves from Each Other and Simply Maintain “Communities” Through AOL Instant Messenger, or Whatever, So that this Virtual Community Usurps Actual Community as a Tenet of Our Values and We as a Species Shrivel and Withdraw and Do Not Expire By Way of (the now curiously intriguing) Nuclear Winter but Simply Cease to Exist in Any Meaningful Way.
    Phoenix, in other words. Shoot that’s already a thing.

And suddenly the idea that conserving space in our cities, towns, and communities by leaving behind the 6,000 pound handbags that we use to put off retirement and murder people just doesn’t seem that crazy. It is one of two logical progressions of how our communities will develop.

Transportation problems are not ones that need a new invention. We have it, and stamp them out for a few hundred dollars a piece. Cars, obviously, are not going anywhere (and nor should they, they’re great), but we need to stop thinking of them as the norm, and start thinking of them as the exception. Without this kind of shift in how we leave the house, we will continue to literally pave the way to living in an asphalt hellscape.

Bicycle evangelists are about as annoying as all the other kinds of evangelists, and so we can be easy to write off. But the premise is unassailable: the only path to livable communities is through a collective embrace of sustainable transportation – buses and bikes.

*I hear only diesel fumes can get it off you.

Crowdfunding

So I guess we’re crowdfunding now? You know crowdfunding, right? It’s that thing on the internet where you can sell people too-good-to-be-true concepts before you figure out how to build them and then instead of figuring out how to build them just keep all that money, and get people to pay for your vacation, and, in fairness, find some pretty sweet grassroots manufacturing projects. If you’re younger than about 40, you’ve probably seen a peer crippled by medical bills and resort to crowdfunding to simply live.

This is literally a tinfoil hat.

Crowdfunding really has a head of steam right now, and for good reason. If enough people chip in just a little bit, you really can accomplish a lot. Just ask the US Forest Service and the National Forest Foundation, who are jump starting a CrowdRise campaign to start chipping away at critical maintenance backlogs on hundreds of thousands of miles of trails in the US.

“It’s an ambitious goal,” they say, “but with your help, we can make a real difference for our trails in 2018. For just the price of a post-hike beer or bottle of Gatorade, you can help us reach our goal.” Together, they say, we can leverage a $500,000 match from the Forest Service to put a million dollars into trails and deferred maintenance. It only costs a couple bucks, and the returns are immeasurable. Can you really put a price on spending time with friends and loved ones surrounded by nature?

Well, maybe.

Right now the USFS trails program suffers from $300 million in deferred maintenance and backlogs. Only 25% of system trails are up to spec. A $500k crowdfunding effort is a drop in the bucket; a bake sale. This is a joke, and not a very good one.

But the concept isn’t all bad. Crowdfunding, right? Everyone can chip in a little bit and we all see massive gains? If only there was a system for this nationally. Like, everyone in the country throws in a few bucks and we all get to benefit from the things we all need and use, but that none of us individually can afford. Like trails. And roads. And healthcare. Shit like that.

I hear the dissenting voices now. Taxation is theft! I can barely afford to live as it is! Why should people in Boston pay for trails in Montana they’ll never use!? And that’s almost fair, partially. Except that taxation is definitely not theft. And so-called tax relief hasn’t really helped you at all. And there’s lots of things we pay for and don’t personally use. That’s how taxes work. I pay for roads in New York every time I buy a tank of gas, and I’m happy to do it. (I could use less of murdering Yemeni children, but I still pay for it).

The idea that infrastructure and civil services should resort to panhandling while our secret police see billion dollar budget increases and the richest people on earth get tax relief is criminal. The solution to infrastructure and land stewardship begins with recognition that these values are central to what it means to be an American, and recreation on these lands drives western economies. Less with the baby stealing; more granola. That’s what I say.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail


 

So Much for Moral High Ground

Hi, I’m new here, or anyway I haven’t been around that long. I just wanted to stop in, introduce myself, and maybe start up a dialogue about, you know, not ruining everything, for a while, anyway. If that’s cool?

It’s just that I remember reading, back in the old days, about how we Americans were pretty great. We won World War One and World War Two! Remember that shit? It was wild. Humanity faced an unprecedented evil in the Nazi empire and Europe couldn’t do shit about it. Who stopped that mess? America. Fuck yeah.

And we, like, rode that for a while. We couldn’t pay for a drink if we tried, remember? It was sweet. The planet even overlooked that whole thing where we murdered 250,000 civilians with nuclear bombs. We couldn’t get away with that anymore (right?). But then anymore it sort of feels like we’re resting on our laurels a bit, aren’t we?

Sure, we liberated the concentration camps in Germany, and that was rad. Mad credit, really. But now we’re just stocking our own concentration camps with the stolen children of refugees? What the shit is that? And what’s our end game there, anyway? Is this one of those things where we take all those kids and give them to good Christian families with impotent men? Isn’t that just The Handmaid’s Tale?

I mean look. Let’s be honest. We don’t have a great track record in Latin America. We’ve done a lot – a lot – of overthrowing democratically elected governments there in support of our trade interests. But folks pretty much looked the other way because of the whole Nazi thing. And I’ll say it again, beating the Nazis at war was badass. Nice job team.

But then now we’re in this sticky spot, you know? Our position in the world for the last, what, like 80 years has been built on this resume of killing a lot of Nazis, and here we are in 2018 electing fucking Nazis in state-level elections. At at the national level, in the White House, we have Nazi sympathizers literally filling concentration camps that are more brutal, more cruel, than the last time we concentrated ethnic minorities into encampments without due process.

This will not be news to non-Americans, but guys we’ve kind of used up our goodwill. It’s sort of like if your roommate borrows your car once, and when you get it back not only is the tank full, but it’s been detailed. Sweet! Good on your roommate. But then you find out that over the next year he’s been taking your car without asking. And returning it dirty. Without gas. And racking up parking tickets. And using it to rob liquor stores. And commit hit-and-runs on cyclists. Suddenly that one time you got it back clean doesn’t really carry quite as much weight, you know?

That’s sort of where the US is these days: the shitty roommate who has long worn out his welcome. That’s not to say there’s no coming back from this. But maybe let’s quit it out with the fascism, right? And jingoism? The xenophobia? It’s not a good look. People are staring.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail


 

Queue the Outrage

For the last couple of days I’ve mulled over what this post might be about, and found, perhaps with a bit of chagrin, that I wasn’t all that full of piss and vinegar. The well of righteous outrage had run momentarily dry.

It’s been a week or two filled with e-mails and spreadsheets and I figured I would settle into something about the importance of planning trips you’ll never take. About how it keeps you fresh, and that simply panning across a globe has a way of shocking us away from our tendency to craft a universe on the scale of streets, blocks, and bars.

That the magic of a vacation is so often in the anticipation of a faraway place and strange food, and that the National Geographic photographs never quite capture the smell of burning garbage and street-vendor salmonella. Sometimes, in the throes of the banal, simply planning a trip is enough.

It was going to be a fine post, and still may be someday.

But then before I got to brass tacks I clicked around on the internet for a while and sipped on a cup of coffee and finally got around to watching that Michelle Wolf thing. You know the one. Hot damn.

If you haven’t watched this yet, take the time.

To be clear – I am not going to say anything here that hasn’t already been said, better, by smarter people. If you’ve followed this quirk of political americana over the past several days (years?), you will have read about the outrage over the speech.

You will have heard the dismay over crude language, and too-cutting jokes, and a media shocked, SHOCKED, that a person with the floor would mock a powerful woman’s looks. If you watched the speech you will probably have felt uncomfortable, if only for a moment. You will have felt, I hope, that it was perfect.

This year’s address at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner had everything, and exists now in perpetuity as a nineteen minute collage of the state of politics, news media, and discourse in 2018. The speech and its fallout has illustrated in an unprecedented way the essential problem with blurring the lines between the naturally antagonistic divide between politicians and the press, and the rapport required there to report the news in any relevant way.

At the center of the outrage is Wolf’s treatment of the WH Press Secretary. Sarah Huckabee Sanders stands daily and defends the actions of an autocrat with willing disregard for the truth, which is why it is so fitting that the controversy surrounding her roast is entirely manufactured. While we argue whether or not Michelle Wolf attacked Huckabee Sanders’s looks and journalists (commentators, etc) throng to the Secretary’s support, we ignore the the fact that she obviously, verifiably did not do that. And so therefore we ignore the power dynamics that underpin the relationship between the press corps and the office. Those journalists cannot do their jobs without daily access to the Secretary, can they be unbiased in their public response to a personal attack, when their livelihoods depend on rapport?

And of course critics of the critiques have not missed the comically scaled whirlwind of hypocrisy, disinformation, and partisan outrage surrounding Wolf’s roast. That she, as a female comedian, was excoriated for poking fun at the taboo, as though the actual pedophilia, the actual threats to jail journalists, the actual assault on the very notion of truth by white men in powerful positions is somehow sanctimonious.

Against the backdrop of conduct that is now commonplace nothing that Michelle Wolf said is remotely shocking. What shocked the room was her gall to say these things baldly, in public, to the faces of those who are accustomed to controlling the narrative and smirking away dissent. All this at an event ostensibly committed to the defense and celebration of the first amendment, and still the outrage.

We will miss speeches like this one if the White House Correspondents’ Dinner is culled; we will miss it more if the evening is further appropriated by the administration as our President has suggested. But we should not be shocked, or outraged at a truth to power sermon. We should be outraged that it is attacked by the establishment it has apparently replaced.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail


 

Elon Musk is Full of Shit

The future is going to be so great, I just can’t wait. I mean, whirring effortlessly in flying robot cars from home to the country club (never work, the robots do the work) sounds great, doesn’t it? Living essentially for free on a surplus of energy and resources? And oh yeah it’s all on Mars? Gosh it’s going to be great.

I mean, we could live in a worry-free state of bliss, for chrissake. Did you know that on Mars gravity is, like, a third of what it is on Earth? We’ll be able to jump really high. It’s going to be sweet (although we may have to change spec on basketball courts). It’s the true leaders that will get us there.

Because like it or not, the leaders of the free world are no longer in government, they’re in technology. Our (humanity’s) largest economies are led, now, by retrograde nationalists who are making calls out of a playbook from 1936. Somehow we have plowed through a second industrial revolution, one where the internet has fundamentally, irrevocably, changed what it means to work, and yet our governments cling to environmental, immigration, energy, and diplomatic policy that assumes the means of production and labor are unchanged from when we first deployed the steam engine.

The void left by our elected leadership to tackle the problems of global warming, historic human migration, and energy production (/storage!?) has been filled by a cast of megalomaniacal iconoclasts at the helms of companies like Facebook, Amazon, and Google. These companies were founded at a time when “don’t be evil” was good enough for a code of conduct, but embraced a business model of disrupting the status quo in pursuit of profit and information hegemony.

Of course outside-the-box thinking has done a lot of good, but it comes in a mixed bag. On the one hand, the “legal” system of taxi medallions and livery service is really just the mafia and was probably due for some competition; then of course on the other hand we have basically everything about Uber. Is there no middle ground? Wildly radical thinking can solve a lot of problems, but there’s not always a reason to throw away everything that we have right now to start over.

For an extreme example, let’s look at Elon Musk’s premise that we should just give up on earth and move to Mars. Sure, it sounds like maybe it’s a decent plan for if we totally screw the pooch and need a mulligan on our first planet, but isn’t that maybe a bit too far? And shouldn’t any technology that renders Mars inhabitable also render an uninhabitable Earth inhabitable without the trouble of leaving orbit and travelling 140 million miles?

And also, isn’t it just a little bit creepy? Is the whole “settle Mars” thing really just a eugenics wet dream for billionaires and their harems? A vaguely biblical nod to paradise filled with virgins? The logical extreme of Silicon Valley’s new infatuation with prepping for the apocalypse?

In the more immediate, more tangible sense, we have the same players dabbling in transportation. No one likes sitting in traffic, and there’s no secret that snarled city streets are an increasing reality for Americans even outside of Los Angeles, New York, Houston. Even in sleepy Missoula, Montana “rush hour” has become a thing you need to think about before heading across town. We have rightly identified travel and infrastructure shortcomings as a central hurdle to improved quality of life, efficiency, and, well, the sustainability of our ecosystem.

That is definitely the logical solution.

Fortunately, we have the benefit of leaders like Elon Musk, with the vision and resources to solve the Great Transportation Problem. First we all buy new electric cars, then we have them drive themselves, then we bore giant tunnels underground so everyone can ride on a hyperloop sleds from place to place at 500mph.

I guess Occam’s Razor is a bit dull.

What if we just rode bikes when we’re not going that far? What if we just threw a few million bucks to utilize the vast rail network that currently exists? Sure, it’s not as flashy as self-driving hovering bullet cars, I get that. But if Donald Trump had invested his inheritance in index funds instead of plastering his name in rhinestones all over the place, he would have been three times richer than he is today. SAD!

Radical shifts in thinking by the wealthiest people on earth are essential to correcting our obviously unsustainable status quo. But that starts with radically shifting who we think those people are. The American middle class is shrinking, but we are still far and away the richest people on the planet. 56% of Americans live on more than $50 per day, compared with 7% of the global population. We are the wealthiest people on earth, and fundamental changes are up to us.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail