From sdcbc-owner@cyclery.com Wed Dec 3 16:40:48 1997 Received: from mailbox2.ucsd.edu (mailbox.ucsd.edu [132.239.1.54]) by lilac.subrosa.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA16250 for ; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:40:47 -0800 Received: from jones.cyclery.com (jones.nas.com [198.182.207.4]) by mailbox2.ucsd.edu (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA19855; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:39:58 -0800 (PST) Received: (majordomo@localhost) by jones.cyclery.com (8.8.5/8.6.5) id QAA15595 for sdcbc-outgoing; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:36:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from lilac.subrosa.org (guy@dt063n78.san.rr.com [204.210.38.120]) by jones.cyclery.com (8.8.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA15587 for ; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:36:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (from guy@localhost) by lilac.subrosa.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA16233 for sdcbc@cycling.org; Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:36:32 -0800 From: "Guy Berliner" Message-Id: <9712031636.ZM16232@lilac.subrosa.org> Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 16:36:26 -0800 Reply-To: guyb@ucsd.edu X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 24feb96 Caldera) To: sdcbc@cycling.org Subject: Why ride in Critical Mass? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-sdcbc@cyclery.com Precedence: bulk Status: ORS I have read some of the archives for this mailing list, and people have raised serious questions about the legality, efficacy, not to say logic, of participating in Critical Mass. I could take up oodles of space on this question. But I'll try to keep it brief, and just address a few specific points I've seen raised. At the risk of setting up strawmen, I will summarize a few of them as follows: 1.) Critical Massers discredit serious efforts to win pro-bicycling reforms 2.) Critical Mass is just wasted energy if it doesn't set out specific goals. Having achieved them, it should disband with it's "mission" accomplished 3.) Environmental advocacy does not mix well with bike advocacy 4.) Specific to San Diego, the "organizers are unprincipled and don't give a rap about bicycling" (perhaps I have been too harsh in my paraphrasing) Let me address the last first, as it is potentially the most harmful to the success of Critical Mass in San Diego, with which I am principally concernced. To refer to "the organizers" is rather misleading. The evolution of Critical Mass everywhere has been heavily influenced by its earliest description as a "(dis)organized coincidence." From my discussions with the earliest "initiators" of Critical Mass in San Diego, they in no way disagree with this view. Critical Mass can be what we make of it. If there is consensus among San Diego Critical Massers for trying to be scrupulous in observing the traffic laws to the extent possible, so be it. I personally feel there are grounds for "bending" the laws, but not to the point of creating great danger for participants. As to not caring about bicycling, I think the crucial distinction between Critical Mass and just another club ride is the emphasis on "cycling as transportation," as opposed to cycling as recreation or sport or exercise. I myself do not ride largely for sport, recreation, or exercise, but for transportation. But I don't see why there isn't room for both types of riders. The first point, 1.) above, I think misses in several ways. First, no matter how "nice" and nonconfrontational you are, as soon as you start to become in any way effective promoting pro-bicycling reform at the expense of automotive hegemony, you will be accused of being "extremist" by someone. You really are wasting your time if you think you can please everyone and achieve this. Second, it has been well observed from the environmental movement that there is a need for a spectrum of activists. Even the Audubon Society used to be called "radicals" before Earth First! came along. "Radicals" play a very important and salutary role by expanding the range of possibilities open to "moderates." "Radicals" actually help moderates look more respectable, and make it easier for moderates to take stronger positions. Finally, "radicals" move the center of gravity of the political spectrum leftward and help keep "moderates" true to their cause, making them drive harder bargains with the powers that be, instead of "selling out." I guess I've already sort of addressed 3.) above in the course of my other answers The second point, 2.) above, is perhaps the trickiest. Clearly, if Critical Mass is a "(dis)organized coincidence," a spontaneous demonstration cum "street theater" in support for more bicycling and less "carring," then it can't have a single definite "agenda," a definite "mission accomplished" date, etc. The very spirit of the event makes this impossible. So, "what *is* THE POINT," you ask? I can answer in several ways, first in practical terms, and then from a "Zen" perspective, if you'll pardon the cliche. In practical terms, Critical Mass offers: o An outlet (for cyclists). Probably all cyclists have experienced great frustration at some point at the insensitivity and inhumanity of moto-centric urban planning. Critical Mass is a chance to get together in solidarity with fellow cyclists. For a short time once a month, we can have a chunk of the road for ourselves, instead of always playing second-class road citizens to cars! o An outlet (for environmentalists). A lot of people, many of whom don't even ride bikes, are pissed-off, agitated, irritated, or otherwise concerned about what our city is coming to. They realize that the bias of our transportation system in favor of Single Occupant Vehicles is a major, if not the principal, contributing factor to most of our problems: urban sprawl, air pollution, water pollution, you name it. They want action, but are tired of just sitting back complaining from their car seats. o A chance to raise the profile of cycling among the general public. Yes, there's always the chance of something going wrong, some people getting alienated, etc. But it's arguably worth the risk. Believe it or not, many people literally don't know they *can* bike for transportation, or it hasn't occurred to them. Some of them may even feel a bit guilty about driving everywhere and contributing to pollution and other problems. But to much of the general public, cyclists are largely invisible, tucked away discreetly in the gutter or a bike lane. It's well worth it to point out to them, as I say in my "user manual" (www.subrosa.org/CM/critmassmanual.html) that "...it is possible, sensible, good fun, and good karma to ride a bike!" o A chance to help put bicycling and other transportation alternatives on the agenda and off the back burner among our politicians and policymakers, by demonstrating with numbers that there is vocal support for doing so. But my main motivation is as a sort of "Zen exercise," if you will. I want what all of the people on this list probably also would like: wide swathes of the city that are bike-safe and bike-friendly. Well, at least one day a month, I, together with others, form just that, everywhere along the route of our ride! This is good in itself, quite apart from anything else. It's a means that is also no different from the end result desired! By moving together as a group, Critical Massers exclude cars from a significant chunk of roadway. The "Critical Mass" is just that, the critical mass, in both density and number, of cyclists required to create a sizable "bike-safe zone," even if only briefly. There is in Zen an expression, "shikan taza," which means "sitting just to sit." It refers to a particular zazen, or meditation, exercise in which the devotee does not deliberately seek any enlightenment or self-improvement, the idea being that the devotee has faith that, in the very act of sitting, he is engaged in the unfoldment of his Buddha nature. At its best, Critical Mass could be considered a sort of shikan taza. Guy Berliner --- To learn more about Critical Mass in San Diego, visit www.subrosa.org/CM You can also get involved directly by joining the Critical Mass mailing list at cmsd@subrosa.org. Just send mail to majordomo@subrosa.org with no subject and the single line "subscribe cmsd" in the body.