@BrooklynSpoke @notjustbikes Good! There has to be a limit to how long we have to explain the same, most simplest of facts. Maybe we need some sort of version of https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/, where we can link to a crowdsourced bedt possible reply to each of these simple, stupid arguments every time we see them, instead of having to type the same thing over and over and over...

@forteller @BrooklynSpoke @notjustbikes Can these people be reasoned with, though? They come into pedestrian streets and run your over, and you still feel like there's hope?

I may be rather naive, but personally I've only really encountered maybe three different categories of viewpoint:

A) "My car represents my freedom, and any criticism of cars is a personal attack on my freedom." I reckon there's no way to reason with these folks. We're just going to have to wait for them to go away.

B) "I am physically and / or systemically trapped, and my car is the only thing that enables me to participate in society, so I can't give it up." They don't disagree with us, but they also don't have the capacity to personally contribute to our ideals, so I don't suppose they need to be argued with.

C) Variation on B, which is "I'm already doing so many other things in other aspects of my life, I don't have the capacity to make adjustments in that part of my life as well." Like, the poor guy who is already rescuing animals and reducing waste and growing his own food and carrying an entire neighborhood on his back, running afterschool programs and coaching sports and spending all his holidays helping those in need, isn't the person I'm going to press hard on trading his electric car for an electric bike.

It seems to me like the kind of person who goes "oh, well, when you put it that way, I'd better get rid of my car, then" is exceptionally rare, and other than that we're just arguing with category A, which we already know aren't going to change their minds. Maybe I just haven't met enough people from category D? 🤷

@eviloatmeal @BrooklynSpoke @notjustbikes @forteller
I'd argue that even the A group is smaller, and that those comments are more of a reaction to the inflammatory moralising attitude that tends to infect the commentary, and so suffer from the "you aren't wrong, you are just an asshole" effect.
Transport is a complex issue at a minimum, and so if someone in (mainly)B, or C, hears 'fuck cars, increase congestion' no wonder their reflexive response is 'wtf I need mine, and can't bike everywhere'

@SirToasty @BrooklynSpoke @notjustbikes @forteller Sure. Yes, A is a very small, vocal minority (they just tend to drive very large-and-in-charge cars, so they are very visible and audible and noticeable, when they are). But my question is, who are we trying to reason with, if everyone falls into one of the categories A, or B / C, and everyone who could be convinced to give up their car lifestyle doesn't drive a car (anymore) in the first place?

I'm certainly naive about these things, but to me most of this discourse feels a lot like preaching to the choir.

@eviloatmeal @BrooklynSpoke @notjustbikes @forteller My general go to depends on the person, but generally revolves around 1. Poor drivers generally don't like driving, getting them into other modes reduces the number of them, 2. If you have to drive, getting people who can take alternatives to do so means less congestion without months of construction. The idea being to change the attitude to supporting bike lanes/better transit even if they 'aren't going to use it'

@SirToasty @BrooklynSpoke @notjustbikes @forteller But has that worked? Like have you gotten someone to stop driving?