601
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by destructdisc@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

This was a Critical Mass event, which is why the bicyclists are taking up all of the street as a way to reclaim the streets and protest the lack of safety for riders under usual conditions. It's not legal, but protests are never useful if they're fully legal now, are they.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MBech@feddit.dk 23 points 1 month ago

Sure, fuck cars and all that, but jesus that is a stupid way to protest. Being very squishy and in low visibility (because it's night), riding slowly while blocking all lanes. Sure, I support their cause, they probably DO need better bicycle infrastructure, but ffs, don't put your fucking life on the line like this. All it takes is 1 lunatic who roadrages, and you're dead.

[-] Ideonek@lemm.ee 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Isn't this true for all protests? My understanding is that people who do them doesn't agree to live with in the constrains drawn by small number of raging lunatics with oppression tools. That's why they organize. Into masses.

[-] MBech@feddit.dk 3 points 1 month ago

Possibly, but do people really wanna be martyrs for a fucking bike lane?

[-] Ideonek@lemm.ee 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

There is a freekonomic episode about how the easiest way to murder someone in US is to run them with your car. There is a reasonable chance you'll go free. US is so car-centric that it's a dogma that car accidents are unavoidable part of life.

So "for bike lane" seams very reductive.

There is an argument that more people will die because lack of protest like that than during those.

This hypothetically raging lunatic don't disappear when you are alone, trying to survive on the infrastructure build without any consideration that you exist. If he's a danger here, he's a danger there. Where you are alone.

(Also, where I live protest like those are coordinated with police. Why is no one protecting nor serving here?)

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Yes.

Source: stood in a bike lane while drivers deliberately rammed me with their car. Twice.

The bike lane in question has plastic barriers protecting it now. Frankly, that direct action was more successful than the previous decade of activism the "proper" way by showing up to planning meetings and such.

[-] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

You're right. It's a stupid way to protest. Instead we should be setting fire to cars parked in bike lanes.

[-] MBech@feddit.dk 6 points 1 month ago

Honestly. Assuming you make sure people aren't actually in the cars before lightning them on fire, that would be a much safer, and much more efficient way to protest. No one is going to park their car in bike lanes if there's a high chance they'll come back to a charred mess.

[-] Ghostwurm@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago
[-] LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 6 points 1 month ago

Of course not. The people applauding the cyclists here and deriding the motorist would be the same ones upset if it was a video of a cyclist encountering a bunch of cars driving illegally on bike paths/lanes.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Huh, it's almost as if cars aren't the same thing as bicycles, differing greatly in aspects like vulnerability, respect from drivers, and existence of suitable infrastructure. Or said another way, it's almost as if punching up isn't the same thing as punching down. Who'da thunk it?

[-] LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago

Never said they were. I posited that reversing the roles would upset people (like you clearly) who applaud the cyclists and deride the motorist.

If you'd be upset by people driving their cars on a bike path in protest of losing road space due to cycling infrastructure they'd be idiots but they'd be the same kind of idiots as these cyclists.

I think treating others as you wish to be treated is generally the simplest, safest rule to live by.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

What you're doing is analogous to clutching your pearls about "white lives matter." It only seems fair or reasonable if you willfully ignore the power dynamics involved.

The oppressed are entitled to get upset about acts of aggression against them. The oppressors are not entitled to get upset when their victims fight back.

this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
601 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

12847 readers
891 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS