Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Far Be It from Me to Use an Alarmis… | Open Satellite Is Closing »

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Transportation / City How to Wage War on Bikes: A New York Times Tutorial

Posted by Cienna Madrid on Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:49 PM

The New York Times systematically dismantles this inane screed against new bike lanes in NYC to create the ultimate blueprint for car-driving freedom fighters to use as they battle powerful bike lobbies around the country. The article reads like Mad Libs, using the best-worst rhetorical tactics to argue why bike lanes will lead to the collapse of literally any healthy American city.

It's as if the NYTimes was personally handing Joni Balter or Joel Connelly a blueprint for their next "War on Cars" editorial. Here is how they'll begin:

Pre-emptive self-exoneration: “I don’t have anything against bikes.”

Invocation of humorlessness of cycling advocates, preferably with ironic comparison to homicidal political faction: “the bicycle lobby … pursues its agenda with about as much modesty and humor as the Jacobins pursued theirs.”

Reference to ominous encroachment of cycling-based anti-Americanism: “City Hall … sometimes seems intent on turning New York into Amsterdam, or perhaps Beijing.” (You know, Beijing: where the communists live!)

Invocation of personal cycling bona fides: “As a student, I lived in the middle of Oxford, where cycling is the predominant mode of transport, and I cycled everywhere.”

Fond nostalgia for pre-lane [INSERT CITY HERE] cycling perils, coupled with implied dismissal of today’s namby-pamby cyclists: “In those days … part of the thrill was avoiding cabs and other vehicles. … When I got back to my apartment on East 12th Street, I was sometimes shaking.”

Go read the whole thing here.

Hat tip, Aaron. I will never curtsy before you.

FacebookShare

Comments (15) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

The ongoing victimization of bicyclists is our society's great tragedy.

Posted by The Wretched Harmony on March 15, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Hay can I get an extra lane for my segway without paying an dime in extra taxes or fees? Segways have the right to share the road, ITS MY RIGHT!!! WHY ARE YOU VIOLATING MY RIGHTS!!!!!?

Posted by Kinison

on March 15, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Good thing nobody who writes about bikes or comments on bike-related blog posts has any bearing on the reality of my commute. Brrr'ing Brr'ing bitches.

Posted by Ziggity on March 15, 2011 at 4:16 PM

#2 is a perfect illustration of the anti-bike/tea party connection.

Posted by ian on March 15, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Cyclists break road rules all the fucking time. Try driving through a college campus without nearly vehicular manslaughtering at least 10 cyclists.

Posted by Central Scrutinizer on March 15, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Cyclists are the new black man!

Posted by Rosa Parks on March 15, 2011 at 4:35 PM

The war on cars is unwinnable. It is time for governments to shift to a treatment based approach. We could throw drivers in jail for the crime of driving, but it's better if the activity is heavily regulated & taxed. And we should fund rehabilitation programs so these sick drivers can begin to responsibly shift to walking, cycling, taking mass transit and integrating into mainstream society.

Posted by Vadt on March 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM

@5: And the 40,000 annual vehicle fatalities, however many hundreds of thousands of injuries, and countless costs in property damage are just the cost of doing business.

Posted by Ziggity on March 15, 2011 at 4:52 PM

@8 should we stop taking showers because more than 40k people a year slip and seriously injure or kill themselves every year? What about drowning deaths, maybe we should ban pools and drain lakes? Oh, and don't get me started on all those planes that kill people every year.

Oh, I also hear going outside can be dangerous.

Posted by Lets ban everything that harms us! on March 15, 2011 at 5:00 PM

" just the cost of doing business."

What do u think would happen to the American economy if tomorrow everyone stopped using cars and hopped on a bike?

Posted by Take an uneducated guess on March 15, 2011 at 5:03 PM

@2 - Roads and highways are only 1/3rd funded by user fees and gas tax. The rest of the money comes from general funds. So other citizens, including cyclists, pay for the other 2/3rds. Also as a cyclist, I also drive and pay user fees and gas taxes. Suddenly people want to use some of that money for other things like bike lanes, and you want to complain? I would like to see the other 2/3rds used for stuff other than roads for automobiles, like bike lanes and public transport, and jack gas taxes up so cars can finally start funding 100% of their roads. That sound good? Why should cars and trucks have their roads subsidized?

Posted by gttim on March 15, 2011 at 5:14 PM

@2
I drive my car on the freeways maybe once every couple months, yet I pay the same taxes as everyone else! I don't collect Medicaid, Medicare, or Social Security, but every single time I get paid I have to pay taxes to support them! I oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet a significant portion of my yearly taxes pays for them! WAH!

In this society, we all pay for things we don't directly benefit from. Get used to it! It's one the reasons the US has been such a nice place to live in the last sixty years or so.

@9
Yes, that's why citing anecdotal evidence ("I saw a few cyclists break the law, they're all total assholes who deserve to get run over!") to de-legitimize the use of bicycles should be frowned upon. Because when you get down to it, if you want to make our streets safer, the handful of cyclists is not the place to start.

@10
Really, eliminating all cars from the road is the same thing as making our roads safer or reducing the number of people driving single occupant vehicles? One thing's for sure, there'd be fewer obese people if as a country we walked/rode our bikes to the store more often, which would drastically reduce our health budget. So in some ways, decreasing car usage would have a positive effect on our economy.

Posted by emor on March 15, 2011 at 5:32 PM

After years of fighting the good fight for bicycles, including 4 years "within the system", I am amazed that there is still debate.

Surveys show that the majority of Americans want to spend more money on bicycle and pedestrian roads and projects -- about 25 percent from what we spend on auto roads.

The paranoid in me has decided that a lot of these "arguments" are not driven by a divided general population (the majority of whom would love to be riding a bike on a safe, carfree path or isolated cycle track or low density bicycle boulevard) but the forces out to make a buck.

Specifically the auto road builders. But also, the Cyclists and their suppliers.

Face it, the last thing the $8000 fixed gear crowd wants to deal with is the $300 Trek gang or worse, a bunch of kids just off training wheels on their tracks.

So, like so much in American politics, bicycling is a cause which -- while desired by the majority -- only has shrill antagonistic voices making the debate.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe

on March 15, 2011 at 5:58 PM

They Came on Bikes From Beijing... the next big indie band.

Posted by luliaQ on March 15, 2011 at 9:06 PM

So...hold the phone. The article is talking about a lawsuit over green tarmac. The picture is of a bike lane on regular road and pedestrians walking on the green tarmac. Is this guy just stirring the turd because he can? If the picture is representative of the lawsuit, it has nothing to do with bike lanes and everything to do foot traffic.

Posted by amyl on March 15, 2011 at 10:28 PM