Canadian Politics Today

I live in a city surrounded by hills and mountains and forests. I like to visit these wonderful places. I like to take my snow-shoes, or my rifle, or both, or just go for a hike. Whatever Marx's vision of the ideal car-free future, I'm highly sure it doesn't include a transit stop at the trailheads where I like to go.  Marx and their ilk would say "yes, but you see, in the futuristic walkable car-free city of tomorrow, there will be ample recreational spaces right in your neighborhood."  But that really only applies if you share Marx's concept of "recreation".

While the driving itself was not the highlight of any trip I've ever been on, I have to say that many of the most memorable experiences of my life have involved car travel.

I hear this type of argument all the time when I talk about the absurdly giant pick up trucks that dominate the market and our roads. "Well maybe people need them for work or recreation" and like yeah some do, but the vast majority simply do not. So I don't think your enjoyment of niche recreational activities are a compelling argument in the face of the myriad social and environmental harms of living in a car-centric society.

And so my complaint with people like Mx Marx isn't that they don't want to drive, its that they don't think anybody else should want to drive either.

I would love to see any cite that shows Paris Marx or anyone else calling for a complete and total ban on personal automobiles. Without such evidence, this whole thing smacks of a strawman.

I'd be genuinely curious what percentage of vehicle trips are taken by choice for pleasure or recreation vs commuting to work, getting groceries, schlepping kids to school and activities. I'd be shocked if it was even 10%.

Ultimately what Marx is advocating for is a world where we average folks lose our "automobility". [They propose that the benefits of a car-free society would more than make up for the loss of the freedom to travel when I want, to go to the places I want, and so-on. I'm highly skeptical.

Because obviously it's all about you?

Also, as i said in my OP, the "freedom to travel" is not what it seems when it involves being chained to a costly and constantly depreciating asset.

I suspect that these benefits would actually mostly be experienced by urbanite indoor-kid snobs (like Marx themself, I imagine).

Yeah only rich urbanites would benefit from improved air quality, less dangerous streets, more financial freedom etc etc. Come on jack.