I’m sure the folks in this community are intelligent enough not to waste time reading National Review, but this is what passes for the conservative “intellectual” argument to keep killing ourselves and others.
By this logic, we shouldn’t have put any limits on tobacco, or required seatbelts.
I love that he just completely ignores the very real ecological impacts of cars in favor of freedom (to sit in traffic and pay an exorbitant amount of fees to insurance companies).
Speaking of freedom, he invokes the specter of surveillance in cities, but cars are literally just rolling computers now that already gather an incredible amount of our data.
There’s so many things wrong with the arguments in this piece, but they all kind of amount to vibes. I guess the author feels like auto drivers are oppressed 🙄.
Here’s an Apple News link for anyone with a News+ subscription: https://apple.news/A-nLoMHTOQlKGHiT9M_7SoA
Improving liveability of cities ran up against far right online bullshit peddlers still hopped up on COVID lockdowns. They’ve somehow decided that congestion charges and pedestrianizing will result in people being monitored by CCTV and banned from leaving their assigned district. It’s obviously false nonsense, but that’s what they are referring to in this kind of screed. Their allies are primed to follow the “logic” from reducing traffic in cities to everyone being effectively under house arrest. Somehow it benefits (((the globalists))). I dunno.
Your car has an ID displayed at the front and rear, can only be driven in certain pre-defined places, and you can only drive it if the government allows you to. But yeah, freedom.
I find it hard to believe that anyone actually believes all the surveillance fear mongering given how much surveillance actually occurs in reality. But then again, people have repeatedly shown themselves to be that stupid.