• Milk_Sheikh
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I guess disagreeing with even a shred of your stance immediately makes me a carbrain boomer, who uses marginalized groups as a prop to justify the status quo huh? Are you even willing to examine an outside argument or use case that challenges your views?

    ‘Right on red’ is a very US-centric scenario. Telling an elderly or disabled person in America to “just use the bus, it’s better for everyone” isn’t a solution, it’s dogma. You are not operating in reality to tell someone for whom moving their own body takes a large physical toll, to take the bus or cycle. Get over yourself and your ideology and see that there are people who genuinely need independent mobility, and that public transport is not a viable solution for everyone.

    Yes it can be better, yes there needs to be change, but fuck dude. Not everyone subscribes to your ideological purity test, and all you’ve done is alienate people who may be sympathetic. I want protected, hardened bicycle routes because I too have had too many close calls with cars and trucks. I want better pedestrian infrastructure and walkable cities. I want light rail and better bus service. All I’ve gotten from you is ad-hominem and hostility. Do better, or you’ll find yourself alone voting for “car free utopia or nothing” law because you flip to insults at the first use case you couldn’t dismiss.

    • drkt@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I guess disagreeing with even a shred of your stance immediately makes me a carbrain boomer

      I didn’t call you a boomer but thanks for telling on yourself

      who uses marginalized groups as a prop to justify the status quo

      Yes, because that’s what you did, and are still doing.

      Are you even willing to examine an outside argument or use case that challenges your views?

      If they present sound logic. Right-On-Red kills people, that’s why it’s primarily a US thing because nobody else is that insanely car-brained.

      Telling an elderly or disabled person in America to “just use the bus, it’s better for everyone” isn’t a solution, it’s dogma. You are not operating in reality to tell someone for whom moving their own body takes a large physical toll, to take the bus or cycle. Get over yourself and your ideology and see that there are people who genuinely need independent mobility, and that public transport is not a viable solution for everyone.

      I did not once tell any disabled person to get out of their personal vehicle. You are pretending that I did because you just want to argue but you have no points and you don’t believe in anything. You could’ve had a point about pragmatic politics but I’m not gonna make your argument for you. You’re old enough to do that yourself.

      Yes it can be better, yes there needs to be change,

      Glad we’re on the same page. I can’t understand why you are arguing against repealing Right-On-Red, then. A change that would literally save lives and require zero infrastructural investment.

      Not everyone subscribes to your ideological purity test, and all you’ve done is alienate people who may be sympathetic.

      Nothing I’ve said is particularly exclusionary. I haven’t said all cars must go. I haven’t said all disabled people must walk. I said car-owners feelings are once again taking precedence over actual human lives. You are also still ignoring that disabled people seem to be getting around just fine, generally speaking, in countries that deprioritize cars.

      I too have had too many close calls with cars and trucks.

      So lets minimize that and get rid of Right-On-Red instead of telling me I’m a fucking puritan idealist for suggesting as much.

      Do better, or you’ll find yourself alone voting for “car free utopia or nothing” law because you flip to insults at the first use case you couldn’t dismiss.

      That’s funny, because my lefty extreme no-car utopia party is up in recent polling. They even control a district in inner Copenhagen. Denmark doesn’t have a pants-on-head retarded 2-party first-past-the-post system, by the way, so voting for what you believe in actually does work over here. I’m sorry you have to deal with your god awful system.

      There is no conceivable universe in which you pull this shit out of your ass in good faith because I have dismissed your disabled-people use case like 4 times now. You’re just ignoring it because you don’t believe in anything and would rather pretend that you’re some holy centrist whose views of the world are infinitely nuanced and beyond the reach of idealists like myself because it’s apparently utopic to not wanna spend your last minutes on earth being dragged underneath an SUV.

      • Milk_Sheikh
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Accuses me of using disabled people as a political prop

        Uses “pants-on-head retarded” as a slur

        You casually drop ableist slurs and personal insults when challenged. I think I’ve heard all I need to from you, but I genuinely hope you figure out whatever spawns this aggression towards someone who has openly stated to be pro-alternative transport. Do better friend, or at a minimum consider being quiet and leaving space for those who are actually working with local government for change 👍

        • drkt@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Don’t pretend that you would engage with my argument faithfully under any circumstances.

        • drkt@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I’m impressed at your inability to just engage with the argument presented, but what else can be expected from a terminally online All-poster.