After nine months immersed in transportation policy, I’ve come to believe something simple: Republicans and Democrats are often arguing for the same thing using completely different languages.
I’m going to remove the specific parties from tbe discussion becuase this is more than a Dems vs Reps thing. But it is indeed not uncommon for people in general to actually more or less agree, but lose nuance or understanding by disagreeing on the language used.
How we frame the issue matters. The Left loses the Right as soon as bike lanes are tied into identity politics. Multimodal equity […]
First of all, multimodal equity is a term that can only be common among transportation advocates like this person. This is jargon, not common terminology. Second, this term is not in any way about identity politics. It is about equity of modes of transport. In other words we should design cities, neighborhoods and roads with consideration for more than one mode of traffic. This has nothing at all to do with “identity politics” except for that the weird hang ups that the right has projected onto the term “equity”. So yes, this may lose the right, but it is not for a good reason.
Multimodal equity is simply “freedom of movement” to a Republican.
Mkay. I don’t think there is anything wrong with either term. For someone not involved in conversations around transportation much, the former is a little bit jargony and the latter is a bit vague. But if you understand what they mean, either term is perfectly fine.
But when Republicans talk about freedom, the progressives hear privilege.
No we don’t. The left sees privilege that the right ignore plenty. But it has nothing to do with their use of the word “freedom” unless you are using the word wrong, such as religios freedom to impose your religion on everyone else.
Aren’t the Left and the Right essentially saying the same thing?
They can be. Are they? Are there people on the right that agree with your advocacy for multimodal equity/freedom of movement? Not according to your own comments:
I’m a Republican, and in nine months of advocating for safer streets, I have yet to meet another one.
You also mention that the Republican Secretary of Transport is more concerned about roads, bridges and ports than about bike lanes, sidewalks and crosswalks. So you tell me. Is the right saying the same things as the left on this subject? Or is it just you? And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.
I would say that (as a non-American lefty), when I hear “freedom” in an American context, I hear “individualism”, and since that’s usually more focussed on “freedom to …” rather than “freedom from …”, then it isassociated with privilege, especially when uttered by middle class people
And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.
Generally, people change their mind from in group pressure, or trauma. That’s really it. Facts from the out-group won’t do it. Looks like a bit of trauma shook the author up here.
I’m going to remove the specific parties from tbe discussion becuase this is more than a Dems vs Reps thing. But it is indeed not uncommon for people in general to actually more or less agree, but lose nuance or understanding by disagreeing on the language used.
First of all, multimodal equity is a term that can only be common among transportation advocates like this person. This is jargon, not common terminology. Second, this term is not in any way about identity politics. It is about equity of modes of transport. In other words we should design cities, neighborhoods and roads with consideration for more than one mode of traffic. This has nothing at all to do with “identity politics” except for that the weird hang ups that the right has projected onto the term “equity”. So yes, this may lose the right, but it is not for a good reason.
Mkay. I don’t think there is anything wrong with either term. For someone not involved in conversations around transportation much, the former is a little bit jargony and the latter is a bit vague. But if you understand what they mean, either term is perfectly fine.
No we don’t. The left sees privilege that the right ignore plenty. But it has nothing to do with their use of the word “freedom” unless you are using the word wrong, such as religios freedom to impose your religion on everyone else.
They can be. Are they? Are there people on the right that agree with your advocacy for multimodal equity/freedom of movement? Not according to your own comments:
You also mention that the Republican Secretary of Transport is more concerned about roads, bridges and ports than about bike lanes, sidewalks and crosswalks. So you tell me. Is the right saying the same things as the left on this subject? Or is it just you? And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.
Good analysis.
I would say that (as a non-American lefty), when I hear “freedom” in an American context, I hear “individualism”, and since that’s usually more focussed on “freedom to …” rather than “freedom from …”, then it isassociated with privilege, especially when uttered by middle class people
Generally, people change their mind from in group pressure, or trauma. That’s really it. Facts from the out-group won’t do it. Looks like a bit of trauma shook the author up here.