For the record, I love my bike and don't own a car. However, the local cycling "activists" in my community are from the same mold as the YIMBY, neoliberal urbanist types. Overwhelmingly white, PMC and childless, who view bicycling and bike infrastructures as the harbinger for livable cites.
When you're a coder or social media marketing douche sitting on an ergonomic chair for 8 hours, cycling for five minutes to and from your loft is an ideal arrangement. However, cycling is a lot less attractive to a blue collar worker who has to travel to a exurb for their grueling 9 hour retail or Amazon warehouse shift standing on their feet. They would much rather nap on the bus after a shift than push pedals for 5 miles.
There is significant research that bike lanes are a trojan horse for gentrification and neoliberal housing development.
In my mid-size city, the twittersphere about local city politics is disproportionately geared towards cycling. It's become a cool kids club for PMCs to get involved in municipal politics, while ignoring much more desperate issues like homelessness and police brutality.
Opposing bike lanes because you don't like the people who support them is just idpolling yourself in the foot.
Bike lanes are objectively good and necessary if we're ever going to get people out of cars.
Sometimes you end up working with people you don't like in politics. It happens.
if you think public transport is somehow in opposition to bike lanes, i don't think you understand how public transport works
in practice, in the us, the majority of bicyclists are working class, maybe don't us children also, women also ride bicycles, so if you want to keep being an idiot, maybe use 'people-children' when you're making weird, inaccurate characterizations also, bike lanes 100% make buses come faster, the number one reason for bus delays is private vehicle traffic also, if you're so worried about improving public transport, maybe look at what uses up 98% of transportation budgets (it's car infra)
there's a whole chapter about it in the book the OP cites, it's like they didn't even read it!
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2014/05/08/low-income-americans-walk-and-bike-to-work-the-most/
Somebody tell my man about inter-modal transport and the last mile.
friend, if you're really interested in learning about this i'll start with this: the netherlands has the most dense and thorough public transportation networks in the world. visit and train or tram station and there and you know what you'll find? a public parking field packed with thousands of bicycles.
that's because it also has the most dense and thorough systems of bicycle infrastructure in the world. this is not a coincidence! in fact, the pattern repeats in every single country with good public transport. that's because public transportation and bicycle infrastructure are completely interdependent and mutually supportive. having one makes the other more viable and vice-versa.
that's because effective mass transport does not deliver you to your exact location, it works on lines and hubs. you need ways for people to disperse to their final destination once they leave the bus or train -- this is called the last mile problem -- and bicycles solve it better than any other type of infrastructure. it's cheap, efficient, cost-effective, and keeps neighborhoods and downtown cores alike healthy and at human scale.
trains and buses without bicycle infrastructure make no sense. it's like building a water main down the center of the street and then neglecting to install pluming into any of the houses. so come on, drop the silly anti-bike thing, it's ridiculous
i'm afraid you're not making a whole of sense repeating that totem over and over
Once again, working class people commute by bicycle more than any other demographic group. Maintaining cars as the dominant mode of transport is incredibly financially oppressive. And, as just explained, building networks for bicycle infrastructure is essential to having mass transit work at all.
Finally, if you're concerned about creating a better bus network, there is plenty of money for that if you reduce the amount spent on subsidizing automobile use which eats up the vast, vast majority of transportation budgets. Your fixation on bike lanes as a problem is based on an irrelevant cultural anxiety, not on any reality. You're like one of those conservatives getting apoplectic about the state spending 10 million spend on the NEA while the military eats up trillions. Your concern is completely misplaced.
Somebody tell my man about inter-modal transport and the last mile.
How do I get to a bus stop if it's a mile away? A BIKE
It’s a bandaid that appeals to manchildren and their toys.
I'm sorry for enjoying 20 minutes of exercise in the morning and evening. My bike cost $80 and I don't pay for gas to get to work
The Netherlands and Denmark show that you can build a whole society around biking + public transport, and that crucially the two forms of transport can be made to work together. People in the Netherlands for example don't all cycle to work, more common is to take a train or bus part/most of the way, and then do the remainder by bike, which enormously reduces the amount of car traffic in their cities to the great benefit of all, while also being perfect for short journeys around a city centre.
At the moment cycling infrastructure and public transport infrastructure is terrible in the US (where I assume you're from) because the neighbourhoods have all been built around car use, but that wasn't the case 80+ years ago, and there's no reason why it should be the case 80 years from now - that is,if people start pushing for positive changes to urban planning now, so that new roads and neighbourhoods are updated to be low traffic, accessible to public transport, as well as pedestrian and cycle friendly.
Just because you decided something is "PMC" doesn't mean it isn't a good idea.
OK but these countries specifically use that a lot because they are extremely flat. Like, various mayors have been trying to force bicycle lanes where I live as a means of gentrification and pretending they are doing something for infrastructure even though it is, like, impossible to cycle for more than 1km without dying of exhaustion because of how uneven the city is. Yeah, bike lanes are cool when they can work and if properly done, but I kinda get where this is coming from.
You know, I never thought of the hill factor. Like the area I live in has pretty consistent bike lane coverage but it's hilly. The only bikers I usually see on the roads are the hardcore types, with the body suits and such
Yeah every time someone puts bike lanes here, that's the only people you see there, because the city is literally built on a bunch of rocky hills.
Motherfuckers should be putting down charming SF style street cars instead of road lanes for sickos to show off in Lycra
I guess e-bikes might make that less of a concern as they become more popular, a lot more expensive that a regular bike but costs seem to be dropping as they become more popular.
Watch this video. No really, watch it. It covers this very topic.
spoiler
Fucking watch it already geez, it's good.
This is such an American problem. Bikes are ubiquitous here, and we literally have separate roads for bikes, it's an awesome mode of transport, not a lifestyle. American infrastructure is so fucking shit for
bikesanything that isn't a car. It's insane.Bikes or bike lanes aren't the fucking problem okay?
Also, see what dedicated biking infrastructure is like
and https://youtu.be/5iFlWteKVlY
I don’t like biking around much because I can go from a nice protected bit of bike infrastructure to shoved in with cars on a busy road.
So I drive or just ride my motorbike.
Honestly one of the few things I 100% unironically love about my country is the biking infrastructure.
It facilitates the use of public modes of transportation as well. Something like 80%+ of those who use public transport start their journey by bike here.
Also biking home after a night out rules.
This is what neoliberal capitalism does. It takes a thing that is good and correct, commoditizes it, and uses it as a virus to inject capital into a community.
There is significant research that bike lanes are a trojan horse for gentrification and neoliberal housing development.
Good point, I guess sprawling exurbs and 12-lane freeways through dense low-income neighbourhoods is the progressive solution after all
Bike lanes aren't the be-all end-all, but it's a vitally important part of re-framing how cities function. They're cheap and easy to implement infrastructure that should be easy wins for any municipality that wants to make urban living less of a hellscape. No, it's not going to be a solution for everyone, but we really shouldn't be building cities around how easy it is to access the Amazon warehouse anyways.
the world's dumbest people cite that book as if it is a condemnation of bicycle infrastructure itself
I love my bike its got a little bell and a crate on the back.
Bike lanes are a good piece of infrastructure. If libs want to spend time advocating for them, that's fine. New transit lines are also be associated with gentrification, but they are also a good and critical piece of infrastructure. Both of these are a step in getting rid of our sprawling car enteric suburban hellscapes. Luxury real estate is going to tear down and gentrify neighborhoods bike lanes or not. Transit/Bike infrastructure should be massively expanded, not just fun activities for the PMC class.
They would much rather nap on the bus after a shift than push pedals for 5 miles.
As someone who has commuted by bike, biking also sucks (and gets far more dangerous) when it's raining or snowing. It's also at least ~$200 for a decent commuter bike, which is a big purchase (that's also relatively easy to steal) if you're living paycheck to paycheck. And you can forget about biking entirely if you have certain jobs -- you can't show up sweating through your suit, and you can't fit a bunch of documents or tools into your backpack.
Don't get me wrong, biking is fucking great in the right circumstances, but it's certainly not a one-size-fits all solution.
Biking is straight up impossible when it's snowy or icy and the streets haven't been cleared. Which they'll never be, if you start early morning.
If you can fit some wider studded tires on your bike, and drop the pressure real low it's doable. Studs for the ice and low pressure for the snow. I usually run 15-20PSI on tires that are normally 45-55PSI. Would go lower, but my commute is on the longer side and don't want a pinch flat in the middle of winter.
Fixed gear or single speed can be helpful, with a slight edge towards fixed gear. An iced over derailleur ain't gonna be doing shit anyway. Plus it's one less thing to break when you don't want to be fixing things in sub freezing temps. Fixed is nice because you can start to feel when your tires are slipping through the pedals.
I've found that with a fixed/low psi/studs setup, snow is doable up to 6-7" if fresh and powdery. 3-4" if it's all churned up by cars, and super easy if the road is either a sheet of ice or compacted icy snow of any depth. So not impossible, but certainly way more difficult. I definitely would not recommend it if you hate cold weather, or are not very comfortable on a bicycle.
no, biking is not a one-size-fits all solution, but if you look at the budgeting and building priorities of cities, they often act as if private car ownership is. the reality is that continuing to maintain cities where cars are the default mode of transport is the neoliberal dream, it pushes a huge amount of negative external costs on to every individual while closing off public space and sapping public resources
biking is great under the right circumstances, the goal is to make those circumstances as common, widespread and reliable -- remember a better world is possible!
Capitalism is amazingly efficient at turning good things (cycling) into bad things (gentrification and class hatred).
your whole rant here is seriously misguided and uninformed.
cycling infra is not a concern exclusive to white, upper class, childless people. in many cities, the vast majority of people who bike are working class and poc, and they are also the people put most in danger of vehicle violence and police harassment when there is insufficient infra. because guess what -- cars are expensive to own and maintain and require licensing, insurance, and other forms of surveilled and financialised interactions that bicycling doesn't!
on top of this, your little vignette of a tired warehouse worker not wanting to bike is a super strange and paternalistic composite based on nothing. that aside, the entire existence of the exurbs and the expensive housing crisis in city cores is based on decades of autocentric planning and subsidies (which were bolstered by the exact same weird idpol arguments you're parroting here!) guess whose neighborhoods got torn down to build car infra? which populations suffer disproportionate health issues due to highway exhaust?
it seems your basing your entire critique on what you see happening on twitter, which is not real life whatsoever. there's no such thing as a cool kids club, either get involved or don't, but don't make your petty grievances and surface level understanding get in the way
Bike lanes and public transpo are gentrifying, yes, but only by the virtue that they make places nicer to live in. The solution isn't to make places terrible (though that can be a stop gap), but decommodifying housing (and in the short term, rent control, public housing, and price flooding)
"Socialism can only arrive by bicycle." –Jose Viera-Gallo
And yes, everyone hates cycling advocates, especially fellow cycling advocates. Narcissism of small differences 'n' shit.
PMC doesn't stand for "private military contractor" does it?
