"Woke" is just code for "anything I don't like, don't understand, or wasn't raised with". Part of the problem is that people don't like their way of life being challenged by the mere existence of cyclists and public transit. The other part is that in many countries the infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, etc) aren't optimized for cycling and that can cause problems when cars, pedestrians, and cyclists are dodging each other.
Many people have spent their entire lives with the idea that car = freedom, and when they see cyclists they fear that they would be forced to give up their precious vroom-vroom-box and associate it with totalitarianism, which they call it communism because of red scare propaganda from the cold war...
This is especially common the more conservative someone is, the more likely they are to be locked into that way of thinking because conservitvism rots the brain. The sheer stupidity of these conspiracy theories would make it glaringly obvious to anyone who puts even the slightest bit of thought.
They literally call the 15 minute city a "socialist conspiracy" of the world economic forum, which they conveniently forget is a capitalist organisation.
In reality both capitalists and socialists should want to have less car dependency, heck, even drivers benefit from having fewer cars on the streets and roads.
I have not had a car in years and have never felt so free. No payment, no gas, no maintenance and no insurance. Granted I live in DC and I can Metro just about anywhere.
Haven't owned a car in over a decade and I 100% agree with you. Cars are a poverty trap which extract wealth from the people (not just car owners, but all tax payers) to the executives and shareholders.
This is true for the people who have to have the newest and shiniest car. Buy a reliable car and drive it until the wheels fall off and it's literally the opposite of poverty trap.
The above said I do agree with the sentiment. I've seen very very expensive cars sitting outside of trailers and other hovels that I wouldn't go anywhere near. I'd rather have a crappy car and a nice house.
I have a "nice" car now because I drive for a living and besides it being good for business to be driving something not falling apart, I spend enough time in it that I should have something comfortable.
What I mean is that the cost of ownership of a car is usually twice as much as people estimate it to be. It isn't just the cost of the car, it's fuel, maintenance, insurance, registration... While getting a beater car is significantly better since it's cheaper, doesn't depreciate as much, and cheaper to maintain than newer cars, people still underestimate the cost.
And what I mean by poverty trap, it isn't just for car owners; taxpayers are the ones footing the bill for incredibly inefficient cities that require a lot of road maintenance, and the parking requirements and generally big sprawl that came from car centrism is much more expensive to maintain, which is why poorer neighborhoods are actually subsidising it for the wealthier neighborhoods. It's literally a steal from the poor to aid the upper-middle and upper class scheme.
If it were up to me, public transit would be completely free and very well funded, once the infrastructure is put in place and people get used to free transit, privately owned cars would be banned from cities and towns over 1000 people, and businesses who need a car would need to request it, explaining the reasons they need it, and be allowed to operate one based on need.
I lived for years without a car but sadly most of the country isn't amenable to biking, walking, bus, etc. I now live in what I call country'ish and if you don't have a car, you're straight fucked. No car means no way to get to stores, work (assuming you don't work from home), etc. Now I drive for a living but we would still need at least one car in our household if we didn't want to continually over pay for groceries being delivered, need to go to Dr appointments, etc.
But would they react the same way if I was on a horse?
Driving a horse and buggy?
I still think it's just basic tribalism. Bicycle rider=wrong tribe.
Anything that isn't a car is a threat to them, but I'd wager they would feel significantly less threatened by it because horses aren't a viable alternative to cars, while deep down they know bicycles can replace cars.
The answer is pretty simple. The modern day far right is pretty much a creation of the fossil fuel industry. Therefore they will fight against anything that might lead to reducing fossil fuel usage.
And anything that they might label -- or have had labeled for them, more likely -- as "sissy."
The hilarious irony being that if any dedicated cyclist kicked your garden-variety right wing asshat, I'll bet they wouldn't find that person so sissy after all. After they got up from wherever they landed.
Carbrains have always been at war with bicycles.
And pedestrians.
And all of nature.
There's a saying that goes something like:
There are two genders, male and 'political.'
Two races, white and 'political.'
Two religions, Christian and 'political.'
Well, guess what: there are also two modes of transportation, driving and 'political.' Riding a bike is a political act, whether you intend for it to be or not.
Huh, I'd never heard of that saying before.
Well I can't say I've heard that racist, sexist saying before lol. Politically I've shifted all the way to slightly right of Atila the Hun and I ride a bicycle when I'm not unicycling with my friends. Maybe you're just sheltered or judging people you actually don't know? It may also be the case people you ride with actually don't agree with your politics.
My guess is because they're idiots.
Because idiots on the Internet keep trying to turn absolutely everything into an us vs them conflict.
My father to a T. I can't impress upon him enough his own complete lack of desire to find a solution, only underlining the problem i.e. whiny baby crying.
My son to a T. He is 25 and can't be bothered to look for solution to any issue, just complains and scrolls tik tok.
Idiocy is across all generations
Cycling as a societal mode of transport deprives capitalist automakers, oil companies, banks, and insurance companies of immense income. The right wing is extremely fervently capitalist and defends the capitalist class maniacally. That is why they defend harmful societal planning that funnels wealth to the capitalist class.
Yes. Because capitalists don't sell bicycles. And right wingers don't ride bicycles. Sound logic
Lmfao
Just trying to get around sounds an awful lot like something the wokerati would do...
First they were over there, now they're over here! Very suspicious.
“How dare those fit as fuck losers take lanes from me? I’ll have to exercise for once if this keeps up!”
It’s lead poisoning.
Ebikes, bicycles, scooters, longboards, unicycles: Whatever floats your goat, this is all things micromobility!
"Transportation using lightweight vehicles such as bicycles or scooters, especially electric ones that may be borrowed as part of a self-service rental program in which people rent vehicles for short-term use within a town or city.
micromobility is seen as a potential solution to moving people more efficiently around cities"
Feel free to also check out
It's a little sad that we need to actually say this, but:
Don't be an asshole or you will be permanently banned.
Respectful debate is totally OK, criticizing a product is fine, but being verbally abusive will not be tolerated.
Focus on discussing the idea, not attacking the person.