At some point, “progressive” politicians looking to “Win the Future” seem boil the future of transportation down to two bipolar extremes: the train and the bicycle. Recently, George Will explained why Obama has the desire named streetcar:
To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.
Time was, the progressive cry was “Workers of the world unite!” or “Power to the people!” Now it is less resonant: “All aboard!”
Advertisement
Beyond the Northeast Corridor, passenger trains at least are a sort of muscular form of nostalgia. But what is it about the comparatively wimpy bicycle that so appeals to leftwing politicians?
In the latest issue of Commentary, in an article sadly not yet online, except in PDF form for subscribers, Fred Siegel and Sol Stern pop the pin on the “The Bloomberg Bubble,” in other words, the media cocoon which nurtured Mayor Mike’s carefully crafted hagiography — even more so than the failures exposed by Bloomberg’s inability to keep Manhattan streets clear this winter.
Near the conclusion of their piece, Siegel and Stern highlight Bloomberg’s obsession with rerouting traffic and pushing bike lanes down the trans fat and tobacco-free throats of New Yorkers, whether they want them or not:
Thanks to his concentration of wealth and power, Bloomberg was able, with the aid of a sometimes supine press, to present his personal policy obsessions as having been endowed with the force of historical necessity. Thus, when he set his sights on a West Side football stadium that would have produced massive traffic tie-ups in the center of Manhattan, the congestion that would have resulted wasn’t considered an issue. When he moved onto the national stage, a hastily conceived plan to tax cars for entering Manhattan was patched together to rebrand his mayoralty as green. But this newfound environmental consciousness had no binding claim on him; indeed, when he wanted to misdirect public monies to subvent the construction of a basketball arena on Brooklyn’s main and often impassible thoroughfare, Flatbush Avenue, the administration again dismissed problems of congestion with a wave of the hand.
Due to the structure of the city charter, the mayor has almost complete control of the streets. And Bloomberg has proved himself determined to create a new streetscape—closing down half of Times Square to vehicle traffic with plans to do the same for the shopping corridor along 34th Street in Midtown Manhattan. And then there are the bicycle lanes, the pet crusade of his second transportation commissioner, a former business consultant named Janette Sadik-Khan.
In Manhattan and Brooklyn, Bloomberg decreed the installation of bicycle lanes on many of the city’s heavily traveled commercial avenues. Little-used and aesthetically unsightly, the Manhattan bike lanes are so important to the mayor’s vision for the city that they were shoveled clean even as the streets of the outer boroughs were buried in the Christmas storm.
Throughout the city, the lanes have made it more difficult to park, made the streets more congested, and made life miserable for truck drivers and delivery services that had to double park 20 feet from the curb to complete their rounds. These undeniable realities do not seem to matter to a mayor who seems to enjoy imposing change on the city whether it is warranted or not.
Which dovetails well into Mark Steyn’s brilliant take back in late 2003 on what made another leftwing northeast executive tick:
There was a revealing moment on MSNBC the other night. Chris Matthews asked Dr. Dean whether Osama bin Laden should be tried in an American court or at The Hague. “I don’t think it makes a lot of difference,” said the governor airily. Mr. Matthews pressed once more. “It doesn’t make a lot of difference to me,” he said again. Some of us think what’s left of Osama is already hard enough to scrape off the cave floor and put in a matchbox, never mind fly to the Netherlands. But, just for the sake of argument, his bloodiest crime was committed on American soil; American courts, unlike the international ones, would have the option of the death penalty. But Gov. Dean couldn’t have been less interested. So how about Saddam? The Hague “suits me fine,” he said, the very model of ennui. Saddam? Osama? Whatever, dude.
So what does get the Dean juices going? A few days later, the governor was on CNN and Judy Woodruff asked him about his admission that he’d left the Episcopal Church and become a Congregationalist because “I had a big fight with a local Episcopal church over the bike path.” I hasten to add that, in contrast to current Anglican controversies over gay marriage in British Columbia and gay bishops in New Hampshire, this does not appear to have been a gay bike path: its orientation was not an issue; it would seem to be a rare example of a non-gay controversy in the Anglican Communion. But nevertheless it provoked Howard into “a big fight.” “I was fighting to have public access to the waterfront, and we were fighting very hard in the citizens group,” he told Judy Woodruff. Fighting, fighting, fighting.
And that’s our pugnacious little Democrat. On Osama bin Laden, he’s Mister Insouciant. But he gets mad about bike paths. Destroy the World Trade Center and he’s languid and laconic and blasé. Obstruct plans to convert the ravaged site into a memorial bike path and he’ll hunt you down wherever you are.
Which sounds very much like Bloomberg today. During the middle of the twentieth century, Robert Moses dramatically transformed New York to keep pace as the automobile become the nation’s dominant form of transportation. Today, Bloomberg punishes car owners, excuses away the root causes of terrorism, can’t get his streets plowed, and the replacement for the flattened World Trade Center is years and years behind schedule.
But he can build a bike path, dammit — so there. Or as Victor Davis Hanson wrote in January on “The Bloomberg Syndrome:”
Quite simply, the next time your elected local or state official holds a press conference about global warming, the Middle East, or the national political climate, expect to experience poor county law enforcement, bad municipal services, or regional insolvency.
But if you want to ten-speed down midtown Manhattan in January, have we got a mayor for you.
Update (3/6/11): Siegel and Stern have a look at the “Blooomberg Bubble” in today’s New York Post, which I believe is an abridged version of their Commentary piece. I’ve only just quickly scanned the Post version, which I believe lacks the item above on Bloomberg and his bike paths. But the Post article should certainly help to place them into the context of the ambitions, failings and fantasies of Bloomberg’s overall reign in the years since 9/11.












Two observations. First, the idea of bike path uber alles is cultural. Part of the East Anglia Danelaw to Puritan Progressive desire to create the perfect ordered society while keeping the outside “them” very much outside. This is why the Puritans treated women more equally, were ordered and stable, with low crime rates, treated animals well (and wrote and enforced laws demanding that), prevented as much as possible abuse inside the family … and hung “witches” and elderly Quaker preacher lades.
That’s a cultural thing that just won’t change.
Secondly, there is a part of me that finds that order attractive. The streets are clean, street cars and trains are nifty, look cute, and work in places like Scandanavia and the like when everyone is part of the same community. Living in a safe, friendly, neighborhood ordered society is NICE, its why the ideal is so attractive.
BUT … the Progressive Ideal of the perfect, ordered society DEPENDS ON a monocultural, mono-ethnic, group of Scandanavians. The culture/ethnicity of Scandanavians are well adapted to this. Everyone is someone’s tenth cousin removed, no one abuses welfare, defaces trains, commits crimes, and so on. Progressive society can ONLY work when everyone is Scandanavian, or Japanese, or Korean, or Finns. When everyone has the same ideas about crime, community, orderliness, and so on.
Multiculturalism means a society like Istanbul, or Manila, or Jakarta, or Nairobi. It means low-slung buildings, tons of motorbikes and cars, everyone engaged in a war of all-against-all punctuated by various progroms and dictators crushing enemies to favor crony groups. Think Kenya’s endless Kikuyu-Luo tribal warfare that will never end.
If you want Tyler Cowen’s “diversity” and “cheap chalupas” then the price of all those ethnic restaurants and “vibrant” life is high crime, high ethnic-racial-religious strife, a fairly brutal dictator to keep things in check, and periodic communal violence shaping an atmosphere of no public spaces (where anyone can be caught out by one’s ethnic-racial-religious enemies) and instead fortress like private homes.
If you want a nice, clean, nifty place like New York Times Square being filled with bikes and nice suburban and upper income urban dwellers exercising and acting like the place is a Tokyo Park, or one in Helsinki, then you MUST HAVE the demographics of those places. Mono-ethnic, mono-cultural. Or you will get folks from different ethnic groups knocking people off expensive bicycles and robbing them. Street cars and subway cars being a mugging free-fire range. With matching Bernie Goetz types, and gradual abandonment. Private cars and motorcycles/scooters allow you to quickly escape enemies: a different tribe, race, religion, or so on. And there are always enemies: think SE Asia’s intermittent riots against Diaspora Chinese.
You cannot have Multiculturalism and Diversity and at the same time, the ideal Progressive-Puritan ordered, safe society. You just cannot. And the idea of an ordered society is DEAD DEAD DEAD. Because America is transformed already into a place where Whites are functionally a minority. The Houston Chronicle reported that “Its Basically Over For Anglos in Texas” and the unstoppable (because of will) exodus from Mexico and Central America, combined with massively higher Hispanic birth rates, promises to make America in all places a Hispanic working class majority, mostly but not exclusively Mexican in culture, with an anxious resentful and so on White minority.
New York City’s future is Jakarta, or Istanbul, or Manila, writ larger. Private fortified spaces, constant ethnic-racial strife, decayed public infrastructure, and so on. Diversity has already killed Bloomberg’s Progressive Dream.
Bloomberg is basically a grouchier version of John Lindsay, aided by the fact he followed Giuliani instead of Robert F. Wagner into Gracie Mansion. Wagner was the one who granted collective bargaining to NYC municipal workers, getting the idea into Democrats’ heads nationally in a way LaFollette’s socialism in Wisconsin never could; Lindsey simply expanded on Wagner’s move with Obama-like spinelessness in 1960s public sector contract negotiations that set the stage for the city’s 1975 bankruptcy.
Bloomberg’s been free to nanny around the edges because he was left a better city by Rudy, and has been smart enough not to hem in the police department, which has left the city safe enough to indulge Mayor Mike in his trivialities, just as Reagan and Bush 41’s actions permitted Clinton to fool around with non-essentials for most of his eight years in the White House. Any Democrat running for mayor in 2013 could win in a landslide if they campaigned to roll back Bloomberg’s self-indulgent actions, but odds are they’ll run and win (especially if Obama loses in 2012) on a platform of rolling back police presence in the city, which a few years down the line will likely leave all of Mayor Mike’s new closed street plazas looking like scenes from “Escape From New York”.