Skip to main content

View Diary: Krugman, NYT Editors Go Ballistic Over Chris Christie’s Termination Of New Hudson Tunnel Project (159 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  While we are, rightly, focused on (19+ / 0-)

    the cons' efforts to limit individual speech, expression and association, we should probably pay closer attention to their effort to keep the people they aim to manipulate from moving around at will.

    It makes sense, if one is fixated on ordering people around, then one does not want them to roam on their own.

    One reason we didn't notice the extent to which individual mobility has been under constraints is because we Americans were persuaded that the private car is a guarantor of being able to go where we want, when we want.  That's a false impression.  In fact, the private car is a cage on wheels, whose route is defined by rights of way, traffic signals, stop signs and, more recently, access restrictions by so-called "gated communities," "security zones," and tolls. Not to mention the monetary requirement to even operate the vehicle. People on foot are restricted from trespass, but trespass (except along interstate highways) involves doing some harm.  People in cars are much more restricted, and properly so, because the car is a dangerous instrument. Nevertheless, the effect of persuading people that a car makes them free is that they are strapped into cages on wheels voluntarily. Hopping on or off a public trolley or train whenever it stops is an exercise of much greater liberty.
    Which is why the cons are opposed to public transit.

    Conservative is sort of like preservative -- not really wholesome, because not organic.  But, "conservative" suggests and effort to preserve that may or may not actually work.  What's certain is that cons are antagonistic -- towards other people and their liberties.  Cons can't do, so they don't want others to do, either, except to meet their demands.

    Cons do to people what some people do to trees.
    http://th183.photobucket.com/...

    People to Wall Street: "LET OUR MONEY GO"

    by hannah on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 02:47:27 AM PDT

    •  Now this is an original analysis! (4+ / 0-)

      Definitely something new and different.

      Thanks for the ride, no pun intended.

      •  You're welcome. (4+ / 0-)

        I suspect that having lived my first 18 years on three continents before acquiring a car, I've always found the car rather constraining and stressful.  Although I've been driving now for over fifty years without a collision of any kind, I'm always aware of the hazards of the road and that we still kill 40,000 Americans with cars every year is a constant reminder.  I don't even want to think how many are maimed, but it does explain why we now have whole hospitals dedicated to trauma and rehabilitation, and not just for the returning troops.

        People to Wall Street: "LET OUR MONEY GO"

        by hannah on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 04:52:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The most government regulation in our lives (5+ / 0-)

      is on the road--- almost EVERY one of your decisions is strictly under control.  Speed limits are one thing, yet I never hear the Tea Party people wanting to remove all the stop lights, lane markings, and other roadside accoutrements.

      Talk about a truth people find hard to wrap their heads around.  

      Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

      by nominalize on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 06:20:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  very interesting thought (4+ / 0-)

      When people talk about the liberating effect of driving, they focus on the fact that you can decide where and when your journey starts and ends.  

      But they don't talk about the fact that during the journey, the government tells you what you can do, and that ain't much.-  You have to wear your seatbelt, you can't talk on the phone, you can't get some work done, you can't play with your kids, you can't eat, you can't drink.  

      Of course, people do these things anyway, and distracted drivers cause most accidents (our cars are really reliable).  But that's not even the driving, which is highly regulated.

      You have to drive on this lane, and stop when the government tells you, go when the government tells you, drive no faster (or slower) than the government lets you, etc.  

      Of course, people will say we need the rules of the road, because of safety.  Voilà! They've just made the argument for all government regulation.

      Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

      by nominalize on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 06:26:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site