An Open Letter to Car Owners in New York City

Car owners in New York City are still in shock over the new bike share program being rolled out. They are still reeling from the steady encroachment of bike lanes into "car territory." Their wasteful, selfish, inefficient and polluting way of life is being encroached upon and they don't like it! Reason completely slips from their minds as they attempt to defend their indefensible lifestyle choice: bikes cause more pollution than cars, bikes are more dangerous than cars, more cyclists will make New York City streets more dangerous! And their favorite: What about parking!

Did I miss something? When did the City guarantee every New Yorker a free place to park their gas-guzzling pollution machine? I know change is hard, but it's time to accept the fact that the roads are for all of us. How about a little perspective?

Putting the loss of parking claim in perspective, the Department of Transportation’s policy director cited that only 35 out of 6800 potential car parking spaces were lost (representing half of one percent), while 600 potential bike parking spots were created.

Imagine that? The same space that had been monopolized by just 35 car owners can now be shared by 600 New Yorkers! Instead of using one of the most inefficient machines ever developed, we'll be using the most efficient human powered machine ever invented!

Change is always hard. The fossil fuel party has been a lot of fun, but it's time to move forward to a more sane use of our City streets.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Citi Bike Scam

The new citi bike bike share program is being rolled out and it looks like a big scam. Of course anything that puts more bikes on the roads is welcomed by me, so there are things I like about the idea. But the overall pricing scheme seems set up to rip off the unsuspecting tourist more than anything. It's not all bad, though, so let's start off with some of the more positive aspects of the bike share program highlighted by the department of transportation:

“For less than the cost of a single monthly MetroCard, an annual

Citi Bikemembership gives you instant access to unlimited short rides 365 days a year,” said Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan. “Citi Bike will redefine what it means to get around New York City, and now is the time to upgrade to this fun, fast and safe transportation option.”

Sounds great, right? It does and that's just the problem because what it sounds like and the way it actually works are quite different. First off for those more casual users getting a day or weekly pass are limited to 30 minute rides. I ride thousands of miles a year around New York City and I can say that 30 minutes isn't much time at all. Combine that with the fact that many of the people riding these will likely be tourists it's certain that people are going to get lost and incur overage charges that add up quickly.

For the 24-hour pass you'll pay $9.95 plus tax. That gives you all the 30 minute rides you can take but should you go over that the next 30 to 60 minutes will cost you an additional $4. If you have it over that hour you'll get dinged another $13 for the next half hour. Meaning a 90 minute ride on one of these bikes could well cost you over $30! Every additonal 30 minutes thereafter will cost you an additional $12. So if you were crazy enough to take the bike out for a whole 24-hour period you'd be looking at a whopping $566.95 plus tax.

Now to be fair, the program explicitly states it's meant for short trips. The website is very clear that if you want to tool around on a bike you should visit one of the local bike rental shops. But that's precisely the problem. The program seems purposefully designed to protect the existing bike rental shops rather than offer them real competition that might actually benefit the consumer.

Now if you're a local and opt for the yearly pass it's going to set you back nearly a $100 and with it you get the advantage of unlimited 45 minute trips. This is a step in the right direction but it's still going to be a tricky. I happen to live in a neighborhood in Brooklyn that is literally saturated with the bike docks. Every couple of blocks there are docks and I still can't figure out how I would use the program if I were so inclined.

Say you wanted to grab one of the bikes to go to the grocery. Unless there is a docking station outside the grocery it's all but impossible. If you wanted to use it for commuting to work or school it would be equally difficult given the time frame and the overage charges would easily mount.

That's what is so frustrating about this system. It's purposefully designed to hit you with overage charges. There's no good reason it couldn't be more like Zip Car where you borrow the bike for a specified amount of time with a per hour rate. Thirty and 45 minute trips are not very long in New York City. True you can get to a lot of places in that amount of time but with the bike share you have the added inconvinience of making sure your destination has a docking station nearby; otherwise you'll incur overage charges.

I'm glad there will be more bikes in the City. This will no doubt accelrate the push for more and better bike lanes. But the pricing scheme seems all wrong. It exhibits all the problems of capitalism where the things we create and the services we build are created for profit rather than people. A truly equitable system of bike sharing shouldn't be that hard to build in a city like New York.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Anarcho-Terrosism?

Steven Kurlander's "A Lesson of the Boston Bombings: Stop Classifying Criminal Anarchist Violence as Acts of War" is a real exercise in ignorance. According to Kurlander, "The Tsarnaev brothers were nothing more than immigrant anarchists carrying on a tradition of political violence, this time framed in religious fervor." To be fair, Kurlander believes "anarchist" is just another word for "terrorist":

Back in the early 20th century, "terrorists" were referred to as "anarchists" (basically the same thing) and carried out what would be termed these days as "acts of war."

Absent from Kurlander's spurious attempt to conflate anarchism with terrorism is the fact that anarchism gave rise to one of the nation's most peaceful social movements ever: Occupy Wall Street. Other anarchist groups like Food Not Bombs have been feeding people for decades. What is typically and falsely regarded as violence by anarchists is nearly always some form of destruction of property: smashing a window, sabotaging an animal trap, or destroying machines used to destroy our forests. Perhaps the most thoughtful reflection on the use of violence by anarchists can be found in Alexander Berkman's autobiographical "Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist" where Berkman highlights the folly of his attempted assasination of the manager of Carnegie Steel. The act was largely repudiated by anarchists at the time and was a major source of growth for both Berkman and the iconic Emma Goldman.

More recently we have "You Can't Blow Up a Social Relationship" which was written over 30 years ago and yet remains as relevant as ever: "A clear explanation of why anarchists oppose terrorism, and why terrorism or propaganda by deed can be of no benefit to the working class, as capitalism is a social relationship, not a group of bad individuals."

In short Kurlander's nonsense is easily refuted by the long history of anarchism and anarchists working to create a better world through direct action, mutual aid, and solidarity. Thankfully many of the commenters pointed this out. One commentator pointed out the salient fact that Kurlander never mentions any of the numerous examples of state sponsored terrorism:

...yet never offers up examples of terrorism committed by the State and reactionary forces against its own population, most notably, the raids on IWW (Industrial Workers of the World) halls by federal and local authorities, as well as reactionary groups often hired by mill or factory owners; the assassination of prominent members of the Black Panther Party in the late 60s by local police forces; the bombing of the MOVE compound, in 1984, by the Philidelphia Police Dept.; the assassination of Martin Luther King, by a member of the KKK; the attack by local, state and federal forces of the Branch Dividians in Waco, TX in 1993; the atempted murder of Judi Bari by planting a bomb in her car for doing both environment and labor work, and lets not for get the killings of young, mostly, black males by police that have been so prominent over the last year its equating to one person dying every 28 hours.

We can't blow up a social relationship. No bomb or act of violence is going to destroy capitalism and the state. The men who bombed the Boston Marathon were not anarchists. And Steven Kurlander should be ashamed of himself.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Links & Stuff

Just enjoying a lazy Sunday morning and thought I would share some links that grabbed my eye.

I love my iPhone for photography. I use to make videos (see above), time lapse photography and it constantly amazes me what I can do with it. If you're a budding iphonographer check out this link for some great accessories for your phone.

Here's more fuel for the fire of the nutty conspiracy theorists who think the bombing of the Boston Marathon was the work of our government. According to the story the first suspect was taken alive. They even have video evidence!

At the other end of the crazy spectrum we have Steven Kurlander conflating terrorists with anarchists over at the Huffington Post. I'll be posting more about this tomorrow, but the comment section does a great job of refuting Kurlander's nonsense. You might also want to take a look at "You Can't Blow Up a Social Relationship," for a great read on why anarchists reject terrorism and violence as a means of social change. It's over 30 years old and just as relevant today.

Perhaps the day's saddest story was reading about how the San Francisco Pride festival rescinded its offer to name Bradley Manning the Grand Marshal. Common Dreams has a great article on this hypocrisy. Apparently corproate criminals are great while heroes like Bradley Manning are questionable.

Hope you're having a great Sunday wherever you are.

 

 

Posted with Blogsy

Look for the Helpers

The bombings at the Boston Marathon revealed just how good most people are. Despite what we are constantly told about human nature, it's events like this that reveal our inherent goodness, our natural inclinations towards mutual aid. As the bombs went off many people ran towards the blast to help people. As Fred Rogers famously said, "Look for the helpers." And the helpers were everywhere to be found.

There was the story of the " young surgical intern who had just finished a 14-hour hospital shift pushed his way through the police lines to treat victims at the end of a marathon route." Or the story of peace activist Carlos Arredondo who kept a complete strangers arteries shut with his bare hand. And who coudl forget the amazing tales of marathon runners continuing on past the finish line another 2 plus miles to donate blood at the hospital! Story after story of everyday courage and compassion emerged through the fog of terror to reveal just how much good there is in the world. No doubt most of them will never get printed, but for anyone paying attention people doing good far outnumbered the two cowards who sought to kill and maim.

As usual, Americans had to turn to comedians like Stephen Colbert to here the real news. As Colbert put it, "These people tried to make life bad for the people of Boston, but all they can ever do is show just how good those people are." As my friend Nick pointed out in his wonderful Boston Recap:

This was the sort of reporting we should have seen more of on Monday and Tuesday. Reporting that honored the strength and power of the people of Boston, that made people in Boston, and around the country, feel strong and uplifted; rather than giving in to the fear and mourning that any terrorist would have wanted us to embrace. It seems trite to say it, but the point of terrorism is to inspire fear. Every moment we stand up straight and saying, "No, fuck you, we're going to keep living our lives and helping each other," is a moment where we prevail and keep our dignity against the monsters of the world that try to steal it from us.

So don't fret. Don't let the fear mongers win. We're just as likely to be killed by our own furniture as by terrorism. Remember the helpers. Share their stories. And the next time chaos descends upon us, look for the helpers; be a helper! Spread the love. Stop the hate.

 

Posted with Blogsy

The Technology of Surveillance.

David Henneberry

One of the most popular memes coming out of the bombing of the Boston Marathon has been the way technology has helped. Story after story has been posted and published detailing the ways in which technology has made it easier to nab the bombers. A lot of this goes toward justifying the spiraling costs of our Big Brother government post 9/11 Security State that wants to keep tabs on us at all times--for our own good, of course. Perhaps the most ridiculous story to surface, however, has been the notion that Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) was instrumental in finding the second suspect, Dzokhar Tsarnaev.

Gizmodo's recent story is a great example of this. But perhaps the best one is their most recent story titled: The Crazy Accurate Thermal Images that Saw Dzokhar Tsarnaev Through a Boat Tarp. We're all supposed to be amazed and delighted that security forces have such amazing technology. More importantly, however, we're supposed to believe that this technology is somehow responsible for nabbing the latest incarnation of evil.

The fact of the matter is this technology had nothing to do with finding the suspect. The man who owned the boat, David Henneberry, was out having a smoke when he noticed something amiss with his tarp. When he went over to inspect it he saw the bloody body of Dzokhar Tsarnaev. You can read the full story here. But there was no major technolgy deployed or used to find this kid.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Reflections on the Boston Bombing

We're not a very reflective society. Immediately after the bombings in Boston people were calling for the heads of the perpetrators. Our instinctive response to violence is always more violence. In response to the attacks on 9/11 we've launched wars across the globe killing at least a million people, creating millions of refugees, and destroying entire nations in the process. Our leaders have codified torture and systemically rolled back our civil liberties. No doubt this attack will be used to roll back even more liberties. Here in New York City we have to show ID to purchase a utility knife. I imagine we will see similar efforts when one purchases a pressure cooker.

What's happening to us a society? It's not just Muslims from far off lands intent on killing us. Our own citizens have again and again went on killing sprees, intent on killing as many of us as possible. While we wage wars in dozens of countries across the globe the number one killer of our soldiers is suicide. And suicides are up across the board. Basically when someones not trying to kill us, we're killing ourselvesat unprecedented rates. Violence begets violence; and our systemic attack on the inherent value of life seems to come home to roost. We don't value life "over there" and we don't value it over here.

Much of the current focus is on regulating gun sales. Gun advocates point to the Boston Bombing as proof that curbing gun sales won't stop the crazies. All of this misses the much larger point that our collective actions at home and abroad are driving people to want to kill as many of us as possible. Calling it terrorism doesn't change this fact.

This isn't to justify any of this violence. But in a nation that routinely uses violence to settle disputes, is it any wonder that citizens and non-citizens choose that same route? When our President doesn't like what's going on in North Korea he doesn't reach out to discuss the issue, he flies nuclear capable bombers over the peninsula.

As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said so eloquently in 1967, "My government is the largest purvayor of violence in the world." We were then in the process of murdering millions in Indochina. Dr. King's sentiments are still true today in a world where the US nearly outspends the rest of the world on death and destruction. Over the last 30 years our police forces have become highly militirized, routinely murdering citizens with impunity, and acting more like an occupying army than a civilized police force.

Our problem is not Islam. It's not East vs West. It's not a problem of regulating gun sales or enhancing the security state. We can't regulate this problem. We cannot legislate it away. There are no easy fixes, but as Noam Chomsky has said again and again there's an easy way to stop terrorism: stop participating in it. Stop looking for violent means to address our problems.

 

Posted with Blogsy