Fahrradsozialismus

Came across this BBC programme exploring some current issues in road use in Britain posted here. Regardless of the necessarily limited background information, perspective & purposefully sensationalistic choice of style & subject matter that is almost inevitable in the mainstream media, it is still an excellent documentary providing some wonderful insights, especially as valuable lessons & warnings for Australia in terms of what can happen when a car culture tries to evolve, though some imageries strangely reminiscent of the early days of cycling:

Mao said once that correctly identifying one’s enemies is of principal importance in the revolution. In this case there are no enemies but ourselves.

Ariel in Disney’s Little Mermaid, fascinated by the human artefacts, remarked that no being who can create so much beauty can be evil (or something along those lines). Without entrapping myself too deeply by trying to define good & evil, especially in the context of human activity (though arguably they only apply therein), but many aspects of what is considered to be “evil” are nothing but complex manifestations of natural selection, that of the strong triumphing over the weak, be it in warfare, politics, economics or personal interaction. It is often despairing to think that despite the glossy appearance of civilisation & progress, we are still inherently driven by the natural laws of survival, and being alive is nothing but a struggle for supremacy, be it over one’s peers or one’s surroundings, just like the rest of what we call life. After all, success is defined by the relative failures of others.

One crucial difference however, is that we are aware, or at least are able to decontextualise actions enough to assign some meaning & order to our seemingly inevitable path of struggle, and rationalise them by creating higher purposes & that little thing called posterity. Taoist view on morality suggests that the very inception of such moral values & social norms are nothing but evidence of triumph of the opposite. Indeed due to the limitation of human language and perhaps cognitive processes in general, ideas are inevitably contrastable.

Ultimately then, this is an issue of universal values, something I have battled with ever since that initial curiosity that many are confronted with concerning what is right or wrong.

Take the varying views presented in the video, I have no doubt each individual view presented is sincerely believed. Isn’t the father wanting maximum comfort, convenience & security a perfectly reasonable response to what is perceived to be a hostile environment, even though others might not? Don’t the actions of critical mass “anarchists” demonstrate a sincere desire to defend & exert their rightful respect & recognition as road users, even if it is also perfectly reasonable to view them as confrontational & disruptive by the everyday motorist? Ultimately people will be first and foremost selfish, that again is perhaps animalistic. Tolerance & consideration for others, at least in the way we understand them, would have to be something uniquely human, and are often forgotten when one’s immediate interest is perceived to be threatened. I believe what I believe because I believe it, yet this applies to everyone, and being individualistic creatures without a shared consciousness, the beliefs will necessarily be different, even if they are rendered into identical linguistic symbols.

As communal creatures, we must make judgement on others in order to interact, and inevitably they will be based on one’s own predilections, even if we consciously remind ourselves to consider others’ opinion, for those still will be our own – evident in the irony that is this very post, but dualism is an integral part of human experience.

Having excelled my previous efforts in having an irrelevant interposition, do I really have anything constructive to offer thematically related to cycling, apart from the usual convoluted syntactic travesties? Not really, since I am only too aware of my biases & unreasonable partialities often on purely emotional & aesthetic grounds, but that, too, is something human.

Perhaps it is empathy towards one’s own kind, but my sentiments have often been on the side of the weak & the loser, be it in history, literature or on the rare occasion, sporting events. It’s not just that old rooting for the underdog mentality, but a general distaste for power projection & imposition, at least on a conscious level – such things should be fictitious & facetious only. One can certainly regard such a mentality as weakness itself or even cowardice, and in the animalistic sense it indeed would be, and perhaps a trend evolutionarily undesirable, but I do believe there is something to be said about holding the welfare of the weak, or more precisely those perceived at a disadvantage to yourself, as being paramount, and disengage from the race to the top, even if just a little bit.

In essence, the message is very simple – be considerate to other road users, and in particular, to those road users who are at a disadvantage to you – even if they might not be reciprocal or in the right technically speaking. For example, I tend to ride onto the dirt next to the cycle path when people take their walk occupying both sides. I’ve also often been given way to at zebra crossings which strictly speaking should only be done for pedestrians. Regardless of actual motivation, be it courtesy or caution, it is simply nice to give & receive such consideration to others. Perhaps a principle of least imposition, if a wanky name is called for.

Granted I do commute in the relatively insulated & relaxed traffic environment that is Canberra. Indeed I often have trouble crossing roads in some parts of China where it would be impossible for pedestrians to cross without forcibly cutting cars off. I don’t know whether such ethos is the product of the environment or vice versa, but I suspect it’s a little of both. Like all such idealisations, it’s only workable in any real sense when everyone is willing to give it a go, but when it become natural, the road will be infinitely more pleasant to use. One could go further and say that such attitude should pervade other aspects of human activity, and indeed it’s certainly not novel in the least in the message. That however, would be an ecumenical matter.

Nearly 1.5 million bikes were sold last year in Australia, compared with just over a million cars. An heartening figure in itself, even though it does not state whether the figure includes children’s bikes or toy bikes, and the figures in the rise of commuter cyclists are stategically given in relative percentages instead of actual numbers. Still, 22% as a national increase average is still considerable.

More information here.

From today bikes will no longer be allowed on trains in Melbourne during peak-hours, directly affecting commuter cyclists who cycle part of the way to work in conjunction with trains. This is in stark contrast with ACT’s recently introduced free bus service for cyclists. The combination of trains & bikes imho creates one of the most efficient systems of mass transit, offering capacity, speed & coverage of a rail network, added with the flexibility of bicycles.

Granted I don’t know how many cyclists actually ride on trains with their bikes, but it was obviously enough for it to be regarded as a nuisance by the operator, in which case there is always the possibility of introducing a bike carriage during these peak-hour runs, even some preferential space allocated for bicycles in a shared carriage. It was indeed surprising to read that bicycles were always discouraged on trains, especially in an era where it is popular for governments to at least appear to be catering for “greener” alternatives to established practices in all fields.

Article here.

Though not entirely comparable, this charming promotional film by British Transport Films from 1955 demonstrates some wonderful possibilities, not to mention some dashing contemporary cycling attire.

New years, and its proximal dates, are supposed to be a time for calm reflection over the passing of yet another artificial & arbitrary temporal demarcation, a time to unleash one’s reservations against the over-commerialised way in which people behave & either spoil yourself or people close to you – all in all, a time where the Dionysian should triumph over the Apollonian just a little bit.

That is until reality hits home.

Why is it that during times like Christmas horrific things are more acutely tragic I do not know, but such unimaginable excruciations for those involved makes it difficult to even contemplate the existence of divine providence regardless of religion.

It is however some consolation that the spirit of Christmas is alive & well in this festive Times article about the woes & lamentations endured by the columnist from the heinous acts of cyclists (allegedly) littering. Whilst I’m almost certain that Mr. Parris’ calls for the decapitation of the (alleged) offenders are nothing more than agitation stylistics ever so popular in media today, especially when there’s very little to talk about initially, it is hardly surprising that it came across as being inexcusably vitriolic, as clearly evident in many of the responses. It does make one wonder why such 2-minute hate sessions are still so prevalent even with post-Orwellian awareness, ranging from trivial issues like these to the demonisation of entire groups of people, and exactly what message the author had hoped to spread.

It might be easy to recognise & criticise conceit & bigotry in those with different views, but one can never fully anticipate reactions from others to one’s own, no matter how carefully one tries & how well-meaning it might be. There’s really no fast & hard rules, as the standards will necessarily be personal. Indeed too much hesitance can only lead to complete obfuscation, not to mention being utterly boring, as I am clearly demonstrating here.

Hereafter anything else I might want to add only increases the compunction for rebuttals in whatever succeeding it, and it’ll really get nowhere, which was where it started originally. If there were to be a point at all, it’d probably be the importance of empathy in getting your message through. You will never make everyone happy, and as interesting as agitprop might be, embracing tolerance & compassion can be very effective, too.

No, not a neglected Sentai show from the 80s sporting fluorescent speedos outside lycra knicks, as interesting as it undoubtedly would have been.

Transport officials in Taiwan are trying to introduce a new term for cyclist – 速人 Su Ren, literally, “Speed Man”, and is defined as someone who uses a two-wheeled vehicle (presumably unmotorised), travelling at less than 25km/h, basically I guess someone who is a pedestrian & a slow moving vehicle at the same time with rights assigned to the respective role depending on circumstance & road condition. The concept is to allow cyclists to share existing infrastructure better with pedestrians & motor vehicles, a part of a grander scheme to increase bicycle usage in Taiwan. Despite of its good intentions, having such a vaguely defined concept could have serious consequences under actual conditions where disputes & accidents do happen, especially in high-density areas like Taiwan. Having dedicated, clearly demarcated cycle lanes like mainland Chinese cities & Europe would cause a lot less confusion for all users, as difficult to implement onto existing roads as it may be.

But some would call that cycle imperialism.

Came across yet another article addressing a driver’s attitude towards cyclists on news.com.au. Whilst no longer too surprised at such apparent display of what can easily be regarded as hatred, it is somewhat curious to observe that from what little data I can discern sieving through the author’s predilection towards vibrant decoratives, the cyclist did not actually infringe upon any road regulations, for as I understand it the cyclist is allowed to use the full width of the road if no dedicated path is available. Whether this is something courteous, safe or indeed wise to do on a busy city road is a different issue altogether. Whilst I applaud the lone rider on his tenacity & audacity in defending his right, I fear many cyclists like myself would not be nearly as confrontational, regardless of road skills. It is simple physics that if any collusion happened, regardless of who is responsible, the cyclist will almost always walk away worse off, if he/she is still able to walk at all.

Cycling is often regarded as being reckless dangerous for both the rider & other road users, whether this is a result or the cause of the decrease in cyclists is unknown, but it is certainly does not encourage any potential cyclists. I personally would think if anything, cyclists, especially those riding alongside traffic would be far more cautious & defensive then car drivers, for the same reason given above.

It is somewhat sad to see that the mentality of regarding cyclists as road vermin, combined with caution/cowardice such as mine to avoid road usage forming a sort of vicious cycle with the latter enhancing further the conviction of the former by the representative lessening of what is already an under-represented road usergroup. With the commuter cycling population being as low as it is, it is difficult to see the situation improve anytime soon without significant changes in road planning & public awareness in these cities.

It is articles like these that make me again thankful for the superlative cycling infrastructure (as opposed to public transportation) in Canberra, which includes extensive shared cycle/footpath all over the city (in addition to the dedicated cycle lanes on many artery routes, sometimes on the same route), thus reducing the need to use car lanes to a minimum. Canberra drivers also seem to be a lot more accommodating towards cyclists, but being a smaller city, Canberrans are more laid back to begin with. Indeed occasionally drivers would slow down or give way even when they have right-of-way, often resulting in confused scramblings from both side (far more ridiculous-looking if you are on a bike).

It shouldn’t be an us vs. them sort of thing, god only knows we get enough of that from every aspect of human interaction, and perhaps it is simply instinct to behave so, but at least we are given the ability to discern & isolate such emotions, and can to a degree check these primordial drives. You can indeed say I am a dreamer, but I know, and sincerely do hope I am not the only one. Man may have brought many unspeakable evils unto the world, but tolerance is something uniquely human, too.

Article here.