Tags:
Permalink Reply by h' 1.0 on October 2, 2010 at 5:59pm
Permalink Reply by tzizzle on October 2, 2010 at 6:25pm
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on October 3, 2010 at 2:32pm
Permalink Reply by heather s on October 3, 2010 at 3:53pm
Permalink Reply by h' 1.0 on October 3, 2010 at 4:49pm It seems that one general issue we *can* agree on is sustainable transportation, right? If we can find a mayoral candidate whose priorities include sustainable transportation (in the form of cycling and public transit), that would be a good start.
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on October 3, 2010 at 5:37pm What I would love! : for Active Trans to sponsor a mayoral debate amongst all the candidates, focused solely on transportation issues. Not just about bikes, but on public transit and pedestrian as well as cycling. Most people in Chicago are not cyclists, but most are pedestrians and at least occasional transit users. It would be nice to see active transportation users as a real and valuable voting block.
Permalink Reply by Dr. Doom on October 4, 2010 at 9:11am
Permalink Reply by Spencer "Thunderball" Thayer! on October 4, 2010 at 9:43am So there is a theme in this conversation: Should cyclists put aside their political identities to rally behind cycling as the driving force for political action? It depends on if cyclists can agree that cycling issues are more important than others.
Does anyone feel this way? If so, then why?
I personally believe that improving the cycling infrastructure and laws in this city should remain a second or third tier agenda. Those candidates whose agendas would further economic and social justice, IMO, are more important than for example those who may want to see improved bike lanes but also would increase the rate of gentrification.
Of course I am not saying that the two are mutually exclusive either. Dr Doom points out that transportation in this city is used as a type of social control. To keep undesired segments of the cities population from having full access to the rest of the city 24/7. Any mayoral candidate who would address this could also accompany a cycling agenda. It's conceivable.
AND WOULD CERTAINLY GET MY VOTE, MONEY AND TIME!
Permalink Reply by David on October 4, 2010 at 11:46am Does anyone feel this way? If so, then why?
So there is a theme in this conversation: Should cyclists put aside their political identities to rally behind cycling as the driving force for political action? It depends on if cyclists can agree that cycling issues are more important than others.
Does anyone feel this way? If so, then why?
I personally believe that improving the cycling infrastructure and laws in this city should remain a second or third tier agenda. Those candidates whose agendas would further economic and social justice, IMO, are more important than for example those who may want to see improved bike lanes but also would increase the rate of gentrification.
Of course I am not saying that the two are mutually exclusive either. Dr Doom points out that transportation in this city is used as a type of social control. To keep undesired segments of the cities population from having full access to the rest of the city 24/7. Any mayoral candidate who would address this could also accompany a cycling agenda. It's conceivable.
AND WOULD CERTAINLY GET MY VOTE, MONEY AND TIME!
Permalink Reply by Dr. Doom on October 4, 2010 at 12:14pm
© 2008-2013 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C. Julie Hochstadter, Director
Powered by