The automobile is a wonderful invention--it really is. It grants the user a level of freedom unprecedented in human history, and, incidentally, equally unprecedented opportunity. With a car, you can travel a thousand miles in 24 hours without adhering to any set plan or schedule. Car ownership allows an individual to live wherever he or she wants irrespective of commute distance or access to public transportation. It is little wonder that much of American planning during the Inter-War and Cold War decades centered on maximizing the automobile's strengths and minimizing its shortcomings. Its strengths, speed and independence, are maximized through the proliferation of faster roadways and more of them. Its shortcomings, large size and fuel cost, are minimized through the proliferation of parking lots and gasoline subsidies. Consequently, the automobile is King in America, as is the motorist, and it is that fact that has devastated American society.
If the motorist is King, what then is the pedestrian, cyclist and passenger? Peasants, really. My father once said to me, as we in the car passed a pedestrian walking in the ditch alongside Columbus Road, "If you want to look poor in America, walk anywhere." In this country, the streets are for cars and trucks, while pedestrians--or heaven forbid cyclists--are imposers. And if everyone drives a car, why bother making a special effort to ensure the roads are accessible to bicyclists and pedestrians? After all, they still have the right to walk/bike along the side of the road (if they are comfortable with being about a yard away from 24 to 1,100 thousand kg*m/s of momentum flying by*) (unless it is a freeway, where pedestrians and cyclists are forbidden). And why bother with public transit? Kids have school buses, and do kids really need to be able to go anywhere besides school and home? And heaven forbid anyone one be a "Jay Walker"; it is only natural that a child's life depend on careful adherence to rules he does not understand, and it is only natural that people be forced to walk hundreds of yards out of their way to a crosswalk in order to get across a 50 foot stretch of pavement (or at least, such thinking has been natural, in America, since the 1920s, when motor companies ran a smear campaign against Jay Walkers).
The fact is, we live in a country where a car is not a luxury but a necessity. Driving does not open up opportunities here--rather, not driving is what closes them. We Americans live in a world where those who cannot drive--the very old, the very young, the very poor and the disabled--are socially disenfranchised by the American fetish for personally owned vehicles (POVs).
On the other hand, the vast majority of Americans are motorists, so does that count for nothing? Since 80% of America's labor force drives to work, and another 10% hitches a ride in a friend's POV, can it not be said that "car-first" policies are good for America as a whole? If we are talking about something that is meant to benefit 90% of America, could the Devil's advocate not say that it may be worth it, if only in an insensitive, Machiavellian way?
No. Putting cars first helps nobody, not even car owners. By encouraging (often to the point of outright forcing) more and more people to drive, which is what these policies end up doing, government authorities have made transport easier for no one. The fact is, people take a mile when you give them an inch. That explains why parking and freeway lanes are far more abundant in America than, say, Germany, and yet there is no significant difference in ease of parking or traffic congestion. In fact, cars often end up being slower than the alternatives, at least statistically. For example, 80% of Ohioans drive to work, for an average commute time of 25 minutes. In Athens, only 50% of people drive to work/class, for an average commute time of 14 minutes. And what are the respective social experiences? The pedestrian sees other people, hears other conversations, interacts amicably (and sometimes belligerently) with others in person, and the same could be said for transit passengers and, to a lesser degree, cyclists. Meanwhile the motorist is at best isolated and at worst frustrated and enraged. And usually stuck in traffic and/or fretting over where to find a parking spot.
All of this is to say nothing of the storm water, water pollution, air pollution, noise pollution and CO2 emissions a country of cars produces. Since these are not directly social issues, I will not go into them. I apologize for going on so long; I hope it wasn't a boring read.
Afterword: I should clarify that I myself am a motorist. Also, I lived in Germany for one year, during which time I used public transit almost exclusively (but still was exposed to automobiles). I know I can come off as sounding anti-car or worse anti-American, but this is not really true. On that note, I focus pretty much exclusively on the US, but much of what I am saying is also true with respect to Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, S. Korea, etc. I just would rather not talk too much about places with which I am less familiar.
*Calculations based on a compact car going 40 MPH vs an 18-wheeler going 70 MPH.
I direct the readers to the following resources:
https://proxy.library.ohio.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat00572a&AN=alice.b5509644&site=eds-live&scope=site
This should (hopefully) take you to ALICE's listing for Citizen Jane, a documentary that details Jane Jacobs' fight against, among other things, the automobile. If you have limited time, I recommend you watch at least 43:00 to 44:00 and 1:07:45 to 1:16:00. I also recommend 59:00 to 1:07:45, but that part doesn't really have anything to do with roads. Basically, I just recommend watching the whole thing, if you have time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_3c3wqPsJo
This is a YouTube video explaining the origins of "Jay Walking" as a social construct. It's quite fun and interesting to watch.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
This is where my statistics came from. It's just the US Census Bureau.
Hi Neil!
ReplyDeleteI am really glad you said something about this because I have experienced it firsthand; I have always been a pedestrian. You explained many things I have never been able to put into words, especially when you talked about how many people would assume that someone who is walking somewhere is poor. While I do plan to hopefully get my license someday, I have walked everywhere my whole life because I have an anxiety disorder that doesn't allow me to drive at the moment. The physical act of walking is not such a terrible thing, but I hate how self-conscious I feel when I am walking down East State street to go to work. I do not want people to pity me because they are watching me walk from their car windows. When I moved to Athens I felt much better about this because it seems to be more of a pedestrian-friendly town. There are many crosswalks, and everything is somewhat close together. However, I notice that when I am not on campus it gets significantly harder to get where I need to go. For example, when I walk to work I have to go way farther up the street than I should because there are only a few crosswalks on East State Street. The crosswalk also only allows people to cross the street one way, so when I am leaving work I have to really hope there's not a substantial amount of traffic. This fits into the context of social geography because it is an example of how the infrastructure of a community limits certain peoples' access to resources. I agree that cars have been huge contributors to our freedom, but it is also restricting the freedom of people who walk.
I'm glad you liked it. Are you the Ally that sits by me, or are you the other one?
DeleteHaha, I'm the other Ally.
DeleteHello Neil!
ReplyDeleteI don't think your post was boring at all to read! I found it very interesting that you have a first-hand experience of this not only in America but as well internationally. I like the part when you said what your father mentioned. Walking around can be viewed as "poor" although it really shouldn't. There are many reasons why some people choose to walk instead of other sorts of transportation. I myself, do not drive to class because I find it hard to get a parking spot around campus. I do have a car, but I only use it to go to work and stores. I agree with you when you said that having a car is no longer a luxury, it is a necessity. To be able to participate in society, most people need to have a car. (other than cities and other places with public transit) But, I understand how not having a car closes these opportunities for people, without a car or some sort of public transportation, it is hard to get around. Our society is now heavily reliant on highways and main roads, one's where it is unsafe to walk or bike! In most situations, people need to commute to work. Most of these job opportunities are too far away to bike or walk, thus these people who do not have cars cannot have this job opportunity. It is really interesting how cars have taken these spaces of people walking.
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for the response--I only just read it because I stopped checking for comments a while ago.
DeleteRereading it, I admit I make all out to be doom and gloom. Since you seem to agree with my sentiments, be assured that urban planning has shifted in recent years; since the nineties, planners have turned face-heel, instead discouraging cars and making the alternatives more attractive. True, we still live in a car world, but you can't undo fifty years of post- and cold-war development overnight.
As a city planner, I'll be sure to make cities right!
Hello, love your post and never really thought too hard about cars impact on society. I love how easy it is to drive cross country but it also creates many issues for the Earth and other animals. The roads make it very hard for animals to cross highways since the amount of lines and the speed that the cars are traveling. If you drive anywhere, it is sad to say but there will probably be at least one dead animal. Also roads only benefit cars and not people walking. So many people get hit by cars every year including at least two people in my family. The people in my family were barely hit but it was still the car's fault since it was the people's turn to cross the street. It has just been a recent movement for bikes to have a bike lane, before they would be cursed at by both people walking and driving. In our society, cars are now more of a necessary item but many people do not have cars or share one with many people. The Cold War also was one of the main reasons why the United States built and relied on highway systems unlike other countries.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the thoughts--now that fall is turning to winter, we really are seeing a demoralizing number of carcasses wasted on the roadways, and that's to say nothing of the danger to humans. I suppose I could have added loss of wildlife and public safety to the list of things I didn't have time to cover in full.
DeleteThanks for mentioning that, really. My thesis is basically about cars, and yet I never considered the environmental impact in terms of animal killed. I really owe you one!
Hi Neil,
ReplyDeleteI’m just now getting around to responding to this post even though I first read it quite awhile ago.
I would even argue that it’s not the motorist that’s declared king through this larger structural phenomenon. Through ownership of the object, we put it on more of a pedestal than the individuals doing the owning. That’s not to say that those who own cars aren’t privileged—they clearly are. If you walk in a car-centered world, you’re an “other”. Using a car for transport, though, is a foil to public transit. It’s operated and owned by the individual in addition to its being a physical indicator of privilege. Even those who do own cars are kept on a short leash, though. I grew up relatively poor and even though my parents have always owned vehicles, they’re constantly repairing, replacing, or otherwise. You’re essentially damned if you can’t afford a new car, can’t get a loan, don’t have good credit, etc. All of this, of course, is incredibly more difficult for people who have been systemically marginalized. Cars aren’t just a necessity, but they’re also an American individualistic and Capitalistic conduit that keep the poor, well, poor.
When I drive down the highway, I don’t see other people driving cars. I just see cars.
Hi, Other Ally! lol
DeleteYes! I love that you mention that bit about how expensive it is to own a car. In Ohio, it's about $4,000 a year--and we're one of the cheap states (Michigan wins at $9,000 a year). This is actually what my thesis is all about: how the government shirks the cost of transportation onto the citizenry rather than providing more equitable transport.
I am so happy that I read this reply. Thank you.
Hey Neil,
ReplyDeleteOnly recently have I been thinking about cars and cities, and how they affect urban planning in this city. I definitely have a love hate relationship with drivivng. I love the freedom cars give compared to public transportation, if I need to go anywhere, I can go. But of course, they are a complete disaster in cities. It makes me wonder how cities will be using cars in the future. I am curious to see if more cities in the United States will start taking the European route in urban design and making it more walking based rather than driving. I guess the only problem with lessening the use the cars is that it can hinder longer travel commutes for those who live in the city.
Thank you because you have been willing to share information with us. we will always appreciate all you have done here because I know you are very concerned with our. tractor
ReplyDeleteHowdy! I just wish to give a huge thumbs up for the nice data you may have right here on this post. I can be coming again to your blog for more soon. Translate Good Evening to Italian
ReplyDeleteThis is my first time i visit here and I found so many interesting stuff in your blog especially it's discussion, thank you. cating
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for this great post. gorilla
ReplyDelete