• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    223 days ago

    That’s kind of analogous to saying we don’t have a problem with zebras, but with zebra stripes. It’s like that old joke, that the morons behind the wheel give the other 1% of drivers a bad reputation.

    But on a serious note, even if we had some foolproof test to weed out the morons, cars are dangerous, loud, polluting, expensive, and anti-social. We have plenty of other reasons to dislike having a society built around them.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -2
      edit-2
      23 days ago

      Well give me a better way to transport lots of stuff from point A to B.

      Guns are dangerous, loud, polluting, expensive and anti-social yet we don’t have fuck guns comm idk why tbh.

      Also there are electric cars and trucks.

      In my imagined dream land I would like to get around on a horse, it would be fun but we have vastly more efficient machinery now.

      You guys need to pull yourself together and stop cieclejerking life away on some most absurd of topics. c/FuckPneumaticDrills when? c/FuckShoppingTrolleys?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        123 days ago

        What stuff? Where does it have to get to? Why?

        That’s not even what cars are used for, as the majority of car trips are under 3 miles, and the average occupancy is 1.2 persons. I think we don’t have c/fuckguns because nobody is forcing us to have and use guns every day for everything.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -2
          edit-2
          23 days ago

          Okay but it’s just a tool to get from a to b with baggage or get stuff from a to b in a very efficient modern way. It’s kinda insane to protest that and I blame westernoidism and living in too lavish conditions.

          Let’s all return to monkey and go on foot with some wagons propelled by slaves muscle power for hundreds miles

          When you say “Fuck cars” you can’t really cherry pick some easy case scenarios where they could be easily swapped for something else. You say something general then you have no way to defend your point usually

          You would have to change to “Fuck people who use cars stupidly” which can be generalised to “Fuck stupid people”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            23 days ago

            We can’t cherry-pick scenarios in which cars could be easily replaced by something else? Good lord, why not?! Nobody has a magic wand that we can wave to undo nearly a century of demolishing and building a landscape exclusively for cars. It’s going to take incremental change to undo that, and the wise way to do that is exactly to cherry-pick the easiest scenarios and start there. Best benefits for the effort, and all. Then, as alternatives expand, those alternatives become an option, or even a better way, for more and more people.

            Speaking of too-lavish conditions, that exactly describes using a 4,000lb. luxury machine to cart a 185lb. body around from point A to point B, which is located much further away from A than it needs to be, in order to accommodate the operation and storage of those machines. It’s really the opposite of efficient—less than 1% of the energy in gasoline gets used to move the human.

            In short, using cars stupidly describes the vast majority of how people use of cars. The reason that it seems reasonable is that everybody else is doing it. Monkey see, monkey do, eh?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              23 days ago

              You can’t cherry pick because the name of the comm is FuckCars. Not FuckICECarsInCities

              That’s the problem with sweeping generalisations. They are undefendable

              using a 4,000lb. luxury machine to cart a 185lb -

              Again cherry picking to paint convenient target for a broad statement.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                223 days ago

                Ah, so your issue is with the branding, not the substance of the argument. Fine, cars are not luxury goods, even though most car commercials sell them as such.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  0
                  edit-2
                  23 days ago

                  My issue is with the people being completely out of it and hating something that replaced horse. Animal labour hello, wanna it back? Fucking westernoids with brain rotten from laziness will find dumbest of things to have a problem with.

                  Another one is odd misguided yearning for imaginary communism that was long ago wholly deconstructed by scholars who every single one became liberal again