[*BCM*] Re: All This Rubbish

[contraelolvido at riseup.net]

>> Yes, at critical mass lanes are indeed blocked as bikes drive by.
>> Similiar
>> to how when a car takes up space, it blocks bikes from being on that
>> spot.
>> It is neither courteous nor not courteous. It is simply transportation
>> and
>> traffic.
>
> Not when it breaks traffic laws, which drivers, when caught, are punished
> for as well.

Critical mass in one sense doesn't break traffic laws, that is natural
laws of traffic that are required for transportation to work. Critical
mass does though break legal laws that many of us feel are not fair, such
as the one abreast rule for bikers. This is a form of civil disobediance.
No one's making you come.

>> Critical mass is the expression of the desires of the city's bikers for
>> a
>> both a more bike friendly city, as well as a the long term elimination
>> of
>> personal and excessive car use and other such pollutents. Critical mass
>> is
>> people actively living out and creating the type of transportation
>> system
>> that they want. How will we create a city with widespread bike use in
>> the
>> future if we're afraid to even ride two-fold today?
>
> Ideally yes, however, CM presents the city's bikers as unworthy of such
> considerations, because they are crass, crude, obnoxious, etc.  For the
> most part, bike riders are not like this.  Unfortunately, the vocal
> minority is speaking for the majority.  I thought you anarchists hated
> that?  SYC anyone?

Seeing as you haven't come on any rides, nor (I assume) do you watch them,
I'm unclear as to how you would know how the ride presents itself. My
experience, as someone who has been doing every ride (minus the freezing
ones) for a while, is that people are generally supportive although
usually even more superised and wondered. Kids love it, seem to think its
a carnival. It's a great way to show that cars are stressful and slow and
that all the fun is on two wheels.

The only people who actively object are the kind of people who get really
upset because they're an extra 30 seconds late and run their car into the
mass hurting folks. Other people may passively object to being late,
though traffic fluctuations often cause them more harm, and hey, I object
to being haveing shitty public transportation and unsafe and polluted
roads, so let them vent. Once again, feel free to disagree, and don't come
on the rides.

As for the minority/majority thing, it's irrelevent in CM. People ride
where   and how they're comfortable. Sometimes peoples desires don't match
and the ride splits. That's perfectly fine.

>> And once again, critical mass is neither a procession, a protest, or a
>> parade nor any other of those silly garabage. CM is a direct
>> manifestation
>> of the type of transportation system we want. It's a place where we can
>> both live out our dreams, as well as actively promote them. It's also a
>> place where bikers empower themselves to keep on biking.
>
> Well, it was originally set up to be.  So I guess someone twisted it's
> meaning.  Empower is a funny word coming from an anarchist.  With no
> tiers, how can there be power structions to move around in?  Abstract
> ideas are hard.  Regardless, it may be your dream to break laws and piss
> people off.  My dream is that people will start presenting themselves as
> human beings instead of beasts, so that we can all live in this wonderful
> dream world more than a few hours a month.

Can you even name where the first CM happened? No, I'm sure you can't. But
if you were to look it up, it was clear from it's inception that it wasn't
a protest at all. The one year celebration pamphlet stated: "CRITICAL MASS
HAS NO CLEAR AGENDA. IT IS A MONTHLY ORGANIZED COINCIDENCE. WE ARE ALL
SIMPLY RIDING HOME... TOGETHER!". Even so, if it did indeed have a clear
agenda, what prevents me from interpreting and duplicating the event in
Boston for different reasons.

And again if you'd prefer to make your contribution to biking by writing a
monthly check to Massbike, then by all means do so. For those of us who
actually want to get together once in a while and bike, leave us alone.
I'm tired of this list being filled with stupid arguments by people who
don't even come on the rides!! I only responded to this because this dumb
conversation has been going on for days and is clogging my inbox.

Oh yeah, and unfounded and unwarranted attacks on political idealogies you
know nothing about are stupid. Simply saying "empower is a funny word for
an anarchist", shows that you neither understand anarchism at all, nor
have any interest in empowering yourself by making decisions and taking
actions that you believe are ethical.

>> Parades, protests and other such wastes of time are where bikers
>> disempower themselves by begging the state or appealing to the kindness
>> of
>> drivers (who will somehow go against their status qou if you're nice
>> enough) to make biking better for us. If this is what you want, feel
>> free
>> to hold a little placard as we bike by you.
>
> The point is to make everyone happy.  The cars lose very little road space
> to bikes.  The PEOPLE in the cars, should they choose biking, benefit
> more.  "status quo" is a term thrown around a lot by people who are
> against it.  Generally anarchists are against the *idea* of a status
> quo.  This isn't a bad thing, but lets be realistic when we talk about the
> status quo.  "They" change to "Us" if the municipality becomes more bike
> friendly.  "Us" needs more "They" to make the municipality change, since
> the municiplaity is made up of "Us" plus "They", and "They" have more
> people.  If negative behavior is directed at "They" by "Us", why would
> "They" like "Us"?  This is called a "positively reinforcing system" in
> which an increase in the input increases the output.  It's also called
> positive feedback.  Positive here only means "increasing".  You're not
> going to have a situation where if you act negatively towards someone, you
> will get a positive(happy) reaction from them.  That's an opposing
> reaction or "negative feedback".

The point isn't to befriend drivers and woo them over to biking. Critical
mass isn't a dog show for bikers, we aren't out presenting ourselfs. It's
simply an unorganized coincidence. And people's reasons for not biking
aren't simply because you haven't been personally nice enough to them.

> Bikes also just aren't practical in every situation.  There is a maximum
> distance that can be reasonibly covered in a time frame.  In the extreme
> where cars are outlawed, the population of cities increases, other kinds
> of polution increase, and there are STILL traffic laws to follow, because
> 300,000 people commuting to work are going to need some order to do it
> efficiently.

Very true. Cars aren't practical in cities. Your point?

> Your arguments are so weak that it is so easy to think of general
> situtions where they fall apart, and not just edge cases.  CM can attract
> the general population, however, the fringe edge case looneys are taking
> it off a deep end fast.  I would like to see it continue and am making a
> stab at voicing how to correct it.

I made an argument? Are you going to explain yourself or just express more
egotistical non-statements. Have you explained how these loonies are
messing up CM? No. Is anyone stopping you from creating your own critical
mass, or are you just an armchair critic?

> This is how the "anarchist" non-system corrects itself.  Consider an
> anrchist system that is completely random.  Some order randomly arises
> that pushes it a certain way, so some other order must arise in equal to
> slightly greater proportion to push back, lest it dissolve into order.

Again, anarchism isn't disorder nor randomness. I feel no need though to
counter your statements on a subject that is irrelevent to this
discussion. Furthermore, you seem to have no interest in actually reading
about anarchism and would prefer to make comments based on your own
personal ignorance.

> -Matt

Pleasure to meet you.