Critical Mass Discussion
After slamming Critical Mass, I'm thinking of doing the one in September so I can see what it's like to participate. I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I can't reconcile all of the inconvenience and disruption caused by CM with its lack of meaning. I appreciate civil disobedience, but only if it's to work toward some goal, which CM doesn't seem to have.
Can you help me understand CM better to help me decide if I should participate? I'm not trolling or being a devil's advocate - and I understand if no one wants to beat this dead horse yet again.
Views: 3218
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Davo on
-
I've seen plenty of cars blocking lights, and occupying more than their fair share of the road. Look at the Damen/Milwaukee/Fullerton intersection during rush hours. Or just south of the river on Damen where there is supposed to be a shared lane. Or by any Starbucks in the morning where they are double parked. There are loads of other examples.
"And Cars don't engage in CM like activities (blocking lights and the like) unless specifically allowed (Funerals)."
-
Permalink Reply by Matt Tennessen on
-
Davo said:I've seen plenty of cars blocking lights, and occupying more than their fair share of the road. Look at the Damen/Milwaukee/Fullerton intersection during rush hours. Or just south of the river on Damen where there is supposed to be a shared lane. Or by any Starbucks in the morning where they are double parked. There are loads of other examples.
"And Cars don't engage in CM like activities (blocking lights and the like) unless specifically allowed (Funerals)."
but they don't do it as an intentional form of activism. they're doing it because they're selfish, inconsiderate, impatient,... I don't think it's helpful to engage in a tit-for-tat as a method for improving social organization.
-
-
My Comment: Boy, I don't like to sound like an apologist for Motor Vehicles. Individual cars engaging in unlawful acts is not mob action. The distinction between Critical Mass and the cited conduct of the cars is quite obvious. If, for example, an individual car rides down the bike lane on Lawrence, that's simply bad and illegal driving. If, on the other hand, a large number of cars decide to ride down the bike lane on Lawrence to take back the bike lane, this is not only bad driving, it is also mob action.
Again, the question is ultimately one of perception. And we lose the battle if we come across as "self-entitled" and "selfish".
-
Permalink Reply by Adam Herstein on
-
Why are bike races okay, but Critical Mass is not? Both shut down streets and can be an annoyance to those driving cars. Is it because bike racing for sport is state-sanctioned and socially accepted, but riding your bike to work is considered anarchist and crazy? Is it because bike races bring in money, while bicycle commuters are riding in the streets for free? Is it because most Americans think of Lance Armstrong when talking about bikes and not the average Joe just trying to get to work? Why is one okay and not the other? Why is it okay that millions die each year at the hands of irresponsable car drivers, yet riding a bike is seen as the dangerous act? Why is it that the average car driver spends ten hours a week stuck in traffic, yet can't wait ten minutes for a group of bikes to go by?
I'm sure the car enthusiasts are complaining about bikes on their forums, just as we are complaining about cars here. Just because something is annoying to some, doesn't make it not right. I truly believe that Critical Mass is not a protest, but since you seem to think so, I'll humor you a bit. What about the civil rights movement in the 1960's? Would African Americans have gotten any rights without civil disobedience? By simply going places that they were not allowed nor welcomed, they fought the status quo and got their rights. Would women have gotten the right to vote if they didn't fight for it at the polls? You say that protesting gets one nowhere, but without protests, our country would still be only allowing rich white men to vote. So if we are to get more bikes on the street and claim to everyone that we have the right to be here, what better way is there than all biking onto the street at once, so that everyone can see us? Some people look at Critical Mass and say "hmm, all these people seem to want to ride their bikes, maybe we should give them more room on the road and treat them like equals", just like someone in Birmingham, Alabama in the '60 said "hmm, all these black people seem to want to ride the bus and sit in restaurants like everyone else. Maybe we should let them, and treat them as equals".
But again, Critical Mass is not a protest. It's just a bunch of people who want to ride their bikes.
-
-
Why are bike races okay, but Critical Mass is not? Both shut down streets and can be an annoyance to those driving cars. Is it because bike racing for sport is state-sanctioned and socially accepted, but riding your bike to work is considered anarchist and crazy? Is it because bike races bring in money, while bicycle commuters are riding in the streets for free? Is it because most Americans think of Lance Armstrong when talking about bikes and not the average Joe just trying to get to work? Why is one okay and not the other? Why is it okay that millions die each year at the hands of irresponsable car drivers, yet riding a bike is seen as the dangerous act? Why is it that the average car driver spends ten hours a week stuck in traffic, yet can't wait ten minutes for a group of bikes to go by?
My comment: Your arguments are pure sophistry. Bike Races are organized, the specific details as to closures and the like are publicized in advance and they normally are not organized to take place at Rush Hour in the middle of downtown. It is these kind of arguments that hurt the cause.
Adam Herstein wrote:
I'm sure the car enthusiasts are complaining about bikes on their forums, just as we are complaining about cars here. Just because something is annoying to some, doesn't make it not right. I truly believe that Critical Mass is not a protest, but since you seem to think so, I'll humor you a bit. What about the civil rights movement in the 1960's? Would African Americans have gotten any rights without civil disobedience?
My comment: Having actually lived through the Civil Rights Movement, its the nature of the protests. The Civil Rights movement certain did engage in some degree of civil disobedience, but what made it effective is that it was mostly sending the message that people are people and that the color of the skin is meaningless. The Civil Rights marchers dressed and acted like the majority of society.
Adam Herstein wrote:
By simply going places that they were not allowed nor welcomed, they fought the status quo and got their rights. Would women have gotten the right to vote if they didn't fight for it at the polls? You say that protesting gets one nowhere, but without protests, our country would still be only allowing rich white men to vote.
My comment: Wow, you really have an over-simplified view of the social history of this country. The protest movements, for the most part, didn't really change things nearly as much as other action. For example, one of the most important actions in the Civil Rights movement was the decision by Truman to fully de-segregate the military. The military, starting mostly in WWII and since then, was one of the most important civil rights actors by forcing people of different races to work together and see that we were all the same.
Protests feel good. They don't work.
Adam Herstein wrote:
So if we are to get more bikes on the street and claim to everyone that we have the right to be here, what better way is there than all biking onto the street at once, so that everyone can see us?
My comment:
That's not what CM does.
Adam Herstein wrote:
Some people look at Critical Mass and say "hmm, all these people seem to want to ride their bikes, maybe we should give them more room on the road and treat them like equals", just like someone in Birmingham, Alabama in the '60 said "hmm, all these black people seem to want to ride the bus and sit in restaurants like everyone else. Maybe we should let them, and treat them as equals".
My comment:
Most people look at Critical Mass and say "look at those freaks messing up my commute. I understand that the Mayor and his Transportation Director are supporting them. Maybe I should vote for someone else for Mayor." Each Critical mass ride makes it HARDER not easier to move forward. And in the South in the 60's it was the commercial boycotts and the support by a rainbow coalition that made the difference. But the Civil Rights message was "see we are like you" and the CM message is "we are not like you"
Adam Herstein wrote;
But again, Critical Mass is not a protest. It's just a bunch of people who want to ride their bikes.
My comment.
Sophistic nonsense. If it was "just a bunch of people who want to ride their bikes" it wouldn't happen during Friday Rush Hour downtown. It would happen on a weekend (such as Bike the Drive) or at Night (Late Ride) or any other time where the Bicycles would have fewer cars to deal with and anti-bicycle messages would not be sent to the public. CM is very clearly a political statement being made by some with the gullible sheep following along. And you may pretend to be one of the gullible sheep, but you are not.
Each time CM occurs, it costs the pro-bike agenda support. If you want a city to turn on bicycles and become unfriendly, keep supporting CM in its current form. If you want the City to support riding, support pro-active positive activities such as Bike to Work Week or even an organized ride a rush hour where the bicycles obey the traffic laws or even issue some "challenges" such as the LA Freeway Construction challenge last year where the Bicycles beat the airplane between two points in greater LA. But those kind of events aren't as "fun" and "self-gratifying".
-
Permalink Reply by Mark on
-
The critics of CCM should realize that it is more efficient and safe and overall less disruptive to keep the riders together and let them clear an area. If the intent of CCM was really to screw up traffic, then it would stop at every red light and get divided into dozens of packs that would be riding amongst cars. That's basically how it felt on the L.A.T.E. ride. I feel much safer on the CCM rides.
-
Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on
-
David,until you learn to use the quotation function of the text editor your hard-to-read run-on replies are probably going to be TL:DR for most folks -even those very few who may agree with you.
-
Permalink Reply by Lisa Curcio on
-
Sophistry? Maybe. There seems to be a dearth of citation to research or authority on all sides for these positions and generalizations.
-
Permalink Reply by Gene Tenner on
-
Chicago Critical Mass is a one-ride-fits-all event. If you go to protest, it is a protest. If you go for fun, exercise, group dynamics, to meet people or to enjoy blowing stop lights then that is what it is for you. Each rider has his or her own reason(s). If it does not fit, do not go; focus your efforts where you believe it will do the most good. Let the rest of us get out of it what we want.
-
-
I agree Gene.
But I have noticed that for some folks it's not easy letting go for others to do what they feel is best in their own affairs. Some people truly deep-down believe that others NEED TO BE CONTROLLED and told what to do (and what not to do) in every aspect of their lives. This even includes where they want to hang out on a Friday night, and with whom.
It's a sickness, I think. Apparently we must have order...
Gene Tenner said:Chicago Critical Mass is a one-ride-fits-all event. If you go to protest, it is a protest. If you go for fun, exercise, group dynamics, to meet people or to enjoy blowing stop lights then that is what it is for you. Each rider has his or her own reason(s). If it does not fit, do not go; focus your efforts where you believe it will do the most good. Let the rest of us get out of it what we want.
-
-
way to completely (dis)miss the point.
1982 called, they wasn't back their vacant sloganeering.
James BlackHeron said:I agree Gene.
But I have noticed that for some folks it's not easy letting go for others to do what they feel is best in their own affairs. Some people truly deep-down believe that others NEED TO BE CONTROLLED and told what to do (and what not to do) in every aspect of their lives. This even includes where they want to hang out on a Friday night, and with whom.
It's a sickness, I think. Apparently we must have order...
Gene Tenner said:Chicago Critical Mass is a one-ride-fits-all event. If you go to protest, it is a protest. If you go for fun, exercise, group dynamics, to meet people or to enjoy blowing stop lights then that is what it is for you. Each rider has his or her own reason(s). If it does not fit, do not go; focus your efforts where you believe it will do the most good. Let the rest of us get out of it what we want.
-
-
Pot/Kettle
Point = Don't like CCM? Don't GO!
If the fact that others DO go gives you butthurtthen take some NSAIDs and get over it. They don't care what you think.
Matt Tennessen said:way to completely (dis)miss the point.
1982 called, they wasn't back their vacant sloganeering.
James BlackHeron said:I agree Gene.
But I have noticed that for some folks it's not easy letting go for others to do what they feel is best in their own affairs. Some people truly deep-down believe that others NEED TO BE CONTROLLED and told what to do (and what not to do) in every aspect of their lives. This even includes where they want to hang out on a Friday night, and with whom.
It's a sickness, I think. Apparently we must have order...
Groups
-
Critical Mass discussion
262 members
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Chicago Randonneurs
269 members
-
Walk Bike Transit
63 members
-
British Bicycles of Chic…
172 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
