[sigil]

The road trips are always about the heroic actions of people like Ken Kesey and Neal Cassady and their amazing automobiles, right? Never, never did it get told that those road trips were only made possible by Eisenhower’s completion of the highway system.

That's interesting. Because Cassady and Kerouac's road trips in "On the Road" happened in 1947, 1949, and 1950 [0]. Construction of the Interstate Highway System didn't begin until 1956, and didn't finish until 1992 [1].

However, if we conspicuously omit the name "Kerouac" and that most famous of American counterculture roadtrips, then like Fred Turner, we too can conclude that no fun ("heroic!") roadtrips happened prior to intervention by the Federal Government.

[0] http://www.dennismansker.com/ontheroad.htm

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Const...

[username223]

You probably don't realize it, but the interstates were built over an earlier system of federal highways (heard of Route 66? That's I-40.). Before federal highways, you could buy "maps" along the lines of "when you see an intersection that looks like this picture, turn right." That thuggish federal jackboot stomping on your face forever can be kind of helpful, eh?

[sigil]

The interstates were built over an earlier system of federal highways...

Which is a complete misnomer, as US numbered highways were and still are maintained by state and local governments [1].

I grew up near the "birthplace of Route 66" so yeah, I've heard of it. It was maintained and improved by a private organization (imagine that!) [2] until the federal interstate push of the 1950s.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highways

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Highway_66_Association

[quinnchr]

According to your own source US numbered highways were funded in large part by the federal government:

"Behind the scenes, the federal aid program had begun with the passage of the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916, providing 50% monetary support from the federal government for improvement of major roads. The Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921 limited the routes to 7% of each state's roads, while 3 in every 7 roads had to be "interstate in character". Identification of these main roads was completed in 1923.[1]"

Also according to your source it looks like the U.S. numbered highways developed in spite of the numerous private organizations existing at the time:

"The new system was both praised and criticized by local newspapers, often depending on whether that city ended up on a major route. While the Lincoln Highway Association understood and supported the plan, partly because they were assured of getting the US 30 designation as much as possible, most other trail associations lamented their obsolescence. At their January 14–15, 1926 meeting, AASHO was flooded with complaints."

[clin_]

This is silly. "Government wasn't important to the construction of our transportation infrastructure" is an argument you're not going to win, and this conversation increasingly feels like you're grasping at straws.

I feel like the reasonable middle ground here is simply what Fred Turner is insisting: the two components are intertwined and symbiotic. Why is that so hard to accept?

[clarkm]

What's the birthplace? I always heard that about the town I grew up in, but I figured every place along the route just said that.

[msabalau]

Of course, even if the interstate highway had been completed, it's a rather odd to feel that the meaning of the work is derived from the literal experience of a particular road.

It's like saying that so much is made of Leonardo's artistry, but no one talks about how that Mona Lisa only exists because of the great genes of the Gherardini family.

[kaonashi]

Why is government activity labeled 'intervention' and private sector activity not labeled as such?

[nhaehnle]

Even worse, whether government activity is labelled 'intervention' does not follow any sound logical pattern in practice.

To make it painfully obvious: When was the last time you heard somebody characterize the existence of limited liability companies as 'intervention'? Who out there consistently calls copyright law an 'intervention'?

It would be possible to use the term 'intervention' consistently. In actual practice, it is (typically) only used as a rhetorical device to support the speaker's preconceived political position. That causes the term to become loaded.

[privong]

Because government activity is generally mandated (both in the sense that they can compel people to change their behavior or that people can't refuse to contribute money towards government endeavours), while private sector activity is generally optional.

[guelo]

That's not the meaning of intervening. It means something like meddling. The point is that when businesses do something to the economy it is not called an intervention.

[kaonashi]

You are by no means forced to participate in any government activity (at least since the draft ended).

[privong]

People in the US are now forced to buy health insurance (or pay a fine/tax).

[kaonashi]

> (or pay a fine/tax)

Then you're not forced into one course of action.

[privong]

> Then you're not forced into one course of action.

You're being forced into parting with your money. So, yes, you are being forced into a course of action.

[jdbernard]

Sweet! Does that mean I'm OK if I stop paying my taxes?

[dkuntz2]

Ask Henry David Thoreau.

[kaonashi]

Taxes are an obligation, not government activity.

[adventured]

There are lots of examples where that's not true, forced selective service for adult males and social security registration at birth to name two.