• The problem with this argument is saying "we're currently operating under the legacy of our own history" is basically saying "we've always done it this way why should we change"...

    No it isn't. It isn't saying that at all. That is actually getting pretty close to the opposite of the argument that I've been making.

    The argument that I have been making is that we need to start making some radical changes so that we can end this legacy that has caused the necessity of motor vehicles. I'm not sure how you conflated that as not doing anything at all but that really isn't what I've been saying at any time at all.

    And it may well be that you aren't concerned about whether drivers feel demonised. However, that opinion of yours is basically irrelevant. It's been borne out time and time again that the most efficient and effective way to bring about social change is to engage people in the changes you want to make. You reckon most people won't even engage in thinking about it or debating it. I say you aren't trying to engage them in the right way. Ranting about how you don't care, that's definitely the wrong way.

  • I'm not ranting :)

    I just said I don't care that much if car drivers get demonised. Why would I? I see all the harm they do, it seems logical to me that they might be. It's not the same as saying they should be.

    You're right about engaging people though, that is the way forward. I just fear that in this case it may be particularly difficult.

About

Avatar for Fox @Fox started