|
|
|
|
|
|
by timssopomo
1397 days ago
|
|
|
It seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that the public at large "wanted" to adjust zoning laws to end up with a car-centric environment. Automakers created the concept of jaywalking [1]. Judges defended the rights of the public to enjoy the streets without cars [2]. Firestone Tire, Standard Oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, GM, and Mack Trucks were convicted of conspiring to monopolize the sale of buses and related products to local transit companies [3]. We live in a manufactured environment, and its manufacture was the result of a decades-long marketing and lobbying effort by industry interest groups, not some grassroots democratic movement. That said, people generally resist any kind of change. That's _why_ it took nearly 50 years of lobbying and an unelected tyrant like Robert Moses to, for instance, really shift New York City's infrastructure in favor of cars. The question is how to make it clear to individuals why a life stuck in traffic isn't in their best interest anymore and hold the government accountable for making improvements. [1] https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history [2] https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/when-cities-treated-cars-... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp... |
|
|
It’s insanity. People dodging cars, cars dodging people and each other. At modern road speeds that would result in mass death.
Besides all that, yes of course we live in a manufactured environment. All environments are manufactured to some degree. And of course car companies lobby for things. But lobbying is not guaranteed to win. People strongly resist things they don’t like. You know what else GM was doing at the time? Selling lots and lots of cars to people who wanted to buy them.