cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/71220185
You must log in or register to comment.
- saltesc@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
If you find out you’re this wrong about one thing and it seems so obvious now, imagine how many other things you’re wrong about but never bother to think about them with any reasoning or detail
- Almacca@aussie.zoneEnglish1 month
That would require having an imagination, or any internal voice at all.
- db2@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
We don’t have to agree on every reason for building safer streets. We only have to agree that Americans deserve to make it home alive.
Then explain ICE you disingenuous fuck.
- Mouselemming@sh.itjust.worksEnglish1 month
Only “Americans” deserve to make it home alive. And his definition of Americans is as narrow as can be.
- 1 month
Except when they murder white people in the middle of the street.
- jtrek@startrek.websiteEnglish1 month
I dunno it seems like the Republican arguments are stupid and the left wing ones are based on facts and evidence.
A bike lane is equity. It is freedom of movement. It is accessibility for someone who cannot drive. It is independence for a 12-year-old riding to school on their own — and an hour back in their mother’s day. It is law and order, using engineering to prevent tragedy instead of reacting to it after the fact. It is Make America Healthy Again — bringing Americans outside, safely. It is economic development.
This is all stuff the left says (minus the Maha branding). The right doesn’t listen. They’re too busy marinating in their feelings.
- 1 month
It’s interesting to watch someone try to blame the Democrats for trying and failing to enact solutions to the problem that killed her father, point out that she’s the only Republican she’s met advocating for bike lanes, and still not see how important it is to talk to other Republicans about maybe building more fucking bike lanes.
- Snowclone@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
it’s that classic republican talking point ‘why didn’t Obama tell us this was a terrible mistake even harder?’
- socphoenix@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
It’s also ignoring everything their fellow republicans are doing. Nevermind the secretary of transportations bullshit, local politics is where most of this kind of shit starts. My town put in protected bike lanes (protected only by collapsible plastic rods), and all the Republican f-550 Sherman tank edition truck owners bitched they couldn’t fit their tanks on the roads until they literally ripped them out a few years later.
- OwOarchist@pawb.socialEnglish1 month
Sherman tank edition
But the Sherman is relatively small as far as tanks go, both in modern context and even back in its day.
The Sherman was the smaller, lighter, cheaper tank that wasn’t as good as most of its rivals on the battlefield, but made up for it by being cheaper and easier to produce, so they were able to field more of them and win through numbers.
- cheese_greater@lemmy.worldEnglish3 days
Love that theres folks able to randomly factcheck and provide context/notes this stuff 🤠
- assembly@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
This is so unnervingly frustrating. Author claims we want the same thing and are talking over each other while recognizing they are the only Republican they know pursuing the thing the author claims Republicans want. When Democrats try and explain to Republicans that these things are good for them too (like single payer healthcare), they plug their ears but somehow it’s still the fault of Democrats and Socialists that we don’t have these things.
- 1 month
They don’t care about these things until it affects them personally.
I didn’t see if the author claimed to have advocated for bike paths before their father was killed. But I’ve just assumed that’s the case, and in the wild circumstance that I’m wrong, it’ll be more coincidence than anything else.
I’m so tired of these fascist-come-latelys jumping on that one specific topic that has now affected them WHEN IF PROGRESSIVES HAD OUR WAY THIER RIGHTS WOULD HAVE BEEN PROTECTED ALL FUCKING ALONG.
edit: I thought I got the impression right - the fucking title: “I thought bike lanes were [bad] then my father was killed”. Fucking fuck off, you fucking fascist prick. Because you still support the REST of the fascist agenda.
- stoly@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
“I have no empathy for others but now that it happened to me, I think it’s important. Too bad that the people who are like me are just the same and won’t care either. Too bad.”
- undecidedyellow@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
The Left and the Right want the same thing.
But also:
I’m a Republican, and in nine months of advocating for safer streets, I have yet to meet another one.
- 1 month
We argue over “DEI bike lanes.”
I have never once, before this, heard of bikelanes as DEI. Man, the righty sphere is so wacky.
- Delphia@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
“Anything I dont like is woke.” Is now just “Anything I dont like is DEI.”
Its a big part of why I disagree with the backlash against saying retarded. People who want to be hateful just move the goalposts and make the acceptable term a slur. Furthermore anyone who calls a mentally disabled person names is a “CUNT” not “a person of dubious personal character”
- DaddleDew@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
Do they even know what DEI means it they just throw that acronym around to describe anything they disagree with?
- 1 month
After nine months immersed in transportation policy, I’ve come to believe something simple: Republicans and Democrats are often arguing for the same thing using completely different languages.
I’m going to remove the specific parties from tbe discussion becuase this is more than a Dems vs Reps thing. But it is indeed not uncommon for people in general to actually more or less agree, but lose nuance or understanding by disagreeing on the language used.
How we frame the issue matters. The Left loses the Right as soon as bike lanes are tied into identity politics. Multimodal equity […]
First of all, multimodal equity is a term that can only be common among transportation advocates like this person. This is jargon, not common terminology. Second, this term is not in any way about identity politics. It is about equity of modes of transport. In other words we should design cities, neighborhoods and roads with consideration for more than one mode of traffic. This has nothing at all to do with “identity politics” except for that the weird hang ups that the right has projected onto the term “equity”. So yes, this may lose the right, but it is not for a good reason.
Multimodal equity is simply “freedom of movement” to a Republican.
Mkay. I don’t think there is anything wrong with either term. For someone not involved in conversations around transportation much, the former is a little bit jargony and the latter is a bit vague. But if you understand what they mean, either term is perfectly fine.
But when Republicans talk about freedom, the progressives hear privilege.
No we don’t. The left sees privilege that the right ignore plenty. But it has nothing to do with their use of the word “freedom” unless you are using the word wrong, such as religios freedom to impose your religion on everyone else.
Aren’t the Left and the Right essentially saying the same thing?
They can be. Are they? Are there people on the right that agree with your advocacy for multimodal equity/freedom of movement? Not according to your own comments:
I’m a Republican, and in nine months of advocating for safer streets, I have yet to meet another one.
You also mention that the Republican Secretary of Transport is more concerned about roads, bridges and ports than about bike lanes, sidewalks and crosswalks. So you tell me. Is the right saying the same things as the left on this subject? Or is it just you? And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.
- Soggy@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
this term is not in any way about identity politics.
Not to reasonable people. But to these ones anything other than extra-wide lanes for their lifted dually with extended wing mirrors for the trailer they never pull is an attack on their identity as a White Christian True American Patriot.
- naught101@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
Good analysis.
I would say that (as a non-American lefty), when I hear “freedom” in an American context, I hear “individualism”, and since that’s usually more focussed on “freedom to …” rather than “freedom from …”, then it isassociated with privilege, especially when uttered by middle class people
- Soggy@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
“Freedom to” vs “freedom from” is one of the core pillars of the problem on a societal level, yeah.
- jtrek@startrek.websiteEnglish1 month
And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.
Generally, people change their mind from in group pressure, or trauma. That’s really it. Facts from the out-group won’t do it. Looks like a bit of trauma shook the author up here.
- cheese_greater@lemmy.worldEnglish3 days
I mean, I like to think I’m open to changing my mind when I find out something I said or believe is called incorrect.
I dont need in-group cuz im basically not part of any group that has that kind of discourse/structure supporting that and yeah trauma can happen to anyone and make them want to avoid it recurring
- 1 month
They didn’t care until some in their in group suffered. Only once it actually entered their bubble did it start to matter. But it still only matters because it’s effected their world directly. It didn’t really make them care about others.
