July 14th.

Hi. I am flattered (I guess) that you think I have a point «worth reading properly», but I honestly don’t know what I could say that you couldn’t find out better by yourself just looking around at what is actually happening to a cycling culture that has been driven into a collective madness by the segregationist ideology and has become hooked on «cycling infrastructure».

Unfortunately, I do not have the time nor the mood to spend time in private one-to-one discussions unless there is a extremely good reason for it. Most of what I have to say about the segregationist allucination is in my blog, in spanish, I’m afraid. However, there are a very few posts there in English:

https://bicilibre.wordpress.com/tag/english/

And if you feel like having a taste of the red pill, you might want to check the (still unfinished) discussion I had with this guy here in my blog, in english:

Un momento de zapping a Twitter.

I say the discussion is unfinished because I haven’t ruled out yet writing a proper reply to my interlocutor there. One of the problems with the segregationist «intellectuals», though, is that deconstructing the nuanced crap in their discourse takes a level of time, attention and energy that I’d much rather apply to fight the stultifying segregationist idiocy I and my group have to deal with on a daily basis and that is corrupting beyond belief the nascent cycling culture in our country.

Now. Do you still think I have some point worth talking about? If you do, and unless you have some other brilliant idea, maybe the best course of action would be to comment somewhere in my blog, so we can carry out a public discussion for the greater entertainment and edification of my readers.

But thanks for your attention. And beware: once you taste the red pill, you won’t be able to take your eyes off the horror of the segregationist nightmare that is lurking all around us.

Cheers.

Txarli Antxels
* Revolution will not happen
* in a bike lane.

July 15th.

Hi Txarli

Don’t worry, I’m seeing your point, and understanding your ire. You’ve got that groovy thing going on in your country, where transport modes mix and people move, by whatever mode, with due regard. It’s something Jane Jacobs observed where children played on streets that cars drove down. And I understand why you would not want anal markings on the street, that give people a sense of entitlement to go full speed because they are in «their», so to hell with the kid who might step into their path. I guess you’re seeing bikes lanes and car lanes as American/Dutch/Danish imperialist imports.

Whatever you’ve taken me saying in a few words on Twitter, must have been directed to some other context. In my book I’m writing , cycle-space, I describe non-segregation as giving rise to something I call a «campus condition» because it works well on university campuses. It’s only limitation, if may say, is it doesn’t extend the reach of urban bike transit, to bring people in from outer suburbs on bikes. That is an issue where there’s great urban sprawl, in the US and Australia for instance.

Feel free to post my thoughts to your blog or wherever, if what I’ve written in any way helps your cause. I’ve just spent 9 weeks cycling cities in Holland, Denmark, Asia, Greece, Italy and the US, so have a feel for the diversity of contexts out there.

Best wishes

Steven

July 21st.

Steven,

Thank you for your permission to post our email exchange in my blog, which i will do as soon as I find the opportunity. (you see, I have trivial things like the idiotic public reactions to this 11-year old girl getting seriously injured in a fucking cycle lane a few days ago a few blocks from my house to deal with). Alternatively, I can post straight away what we have so far of this conversation, if you prefer to continue the talk in the comment thread. It is ok for me.

You might have got some of the points of, as you say, my ire, but I very much doubt that you grasp the full extent of the catastrophe we (and very likely you) are diving into. In this issue, as the saying goes, if you are not angry, you are not paying attention. (Or -I might add-, you have a vested interest in the outrage).

Your use of the term «non-segregation» for what is just plain, natural cycling is interesting; it is like hearing someone calling western societies «infidel countries»: you can tell right away that the speaker is an, er, faithful, no matter how moderate and reasonable he strives to appear.)

It is also funny that you come up with the term «campus condition» to describe some presumably beneficial outcome of, ahem, «non-segregation»: we are seeing here a host of (awful) segregated lanes being build in university campuses, because apparently the cycling community and the political class here have been dragged so far down into the mud by the segregationist bullshit that not even a campus is now safe enough for a twientysomething in his/her prime to ride a bike in a normal campus street. How long until you get segregated lanes built into your campuses? what will you do then, dear sir?

Since you yourself introduced the «campus condition» idea, I take it you will agree that when segregated lanes are built in a campus, someone is doing something wrong. Very wrong. Of course, it is easy to dismiss the issue as technical incompetence, a political or bureaucratic blunder, an instance of «excess of (segregationist) zeal», or other such clichés: I think I have heard them all by now. But doing so only misses (or even worse: hides) the core of the problem: there is nothing specifically wrong with segregated lanes in campuses; there is just something horribly wrong with a cycling culture, a cycling ideology, a cycling policy and a cycling community in which campus segregated lanes (however «high quality» they might be, which they aren’t) get built at all and considered «a step forward».

Because, you see: you and I might (perhaps) agree that segregated lanes in a campus are a stupid idea, but the cycling community in my country think they are cool and «uropean»; What do the cycling community in your contry think? Did I tell you about how the segregationist ideology has corrupted the cycling community? yes, I think I did.

I am not mad at a few stupid, useless and dangerous segregated lanes being built around: I am only angry about that. What i AM mad at is a cycling community that, drugged by the segregationist cycle-crack peddlers (like, for instance, Mr Copenhagenize), has lost all self-respect to the point of not being able any longer to tell the lane-shit from the cycle-food; check the comments to the girls accident to see what I am talking about. And I am mad at a new generation of useful idiots (like, i suspect with due respect, yourself) that, in the guise of «researchers», «technicians», «planners», «eco-or-mobility-advocates» or even «moderate vehiculars» are giving conceptual cover and social credibility to the appalling heap of horsecrap that the cycling community is burying its head into.

There is only one way out of the corner urban cycling has, literally, painted itself into: segregation has to be vigorously, publicly denounced for what it is: a cul-de-sac in the history of urban cycling that originated in a very specific setting and has evolved into a collective and poisonous allucination that is hindering the return of the bicycle to its due place in modern cities after the disastrous XXth century car hiatus. Guys like yourself, with your oh-so-civil, oh-so-nuanced, consensus-seeking, using-words-in-proper-context pose are bound to get caught in the crossfire and are, in short, just getting in the way of the future. You’d better swallow the red pill and start anew.

Cheers.

Txarli
If «Cycle lane» is the answer
you got the question wrong.

July 22sd.

Thanks again for your time. Have you spent much time in Denmark or Holland? It really is nice to be able to ride in the knowledge that your way has been cleared. It’s nice riding in New York, having pedestrians cleared out of your path by the taxis. It’s nice cycling down Via del Corso in Rome on a Saturday afternoon. There I go, being nuanced. I would use the term «dialectical». Anyway, while I can agree on particular points, I can no more side with you, than anyone else with a clear one-eyed view of how all the world aught to be. The failures of Modernism/Structuralist thinking, instilled in me a healthy measure of self doubt.

Best wishes

Steven

July 22sd.

«The pleasure of having your way cleared?» Oh, c’mon. Are you trying to offer your prose as an example of the most grotesque points of segregationism and of cyclist’s exceptionalism?

Too bad you didn’t take the time to cycle in Madrid, purportedly one of the most hostile cities for cycling in Europe. A tour around Madrid with one of the guys in my group would have, obviously, failed to show you the pleasure of cycling here (in traffic, gasp! and without you way cleared, oh noes!), and the deep idiocy of what is said about urban cycling in the more «cycle-lane-civilized» countries, because obviously that is something you don’t want to know.

Sorry to say this, but apparently you sided with the past and you are exactly the kind of people we have to push out of the way of to get urban cycling out of the hole it is in.

The future is ours. Get a grip.

Cheers.