A pocket of conservatives are stupidly attacking land use and transportation policy that's about as conservative as can be. Here's one way to handle that.
I appreciate Point #10. As a libertarian I want to see different land use, housing and transportation options compete on a level playing field without subsidies or unchecked externalities. However, a lot of the "urbanist" commentary I see on the Stack seems designed to provoke the reaction:
"At the heart of this movement is a fanatical hatred of the automobile. New Urbanists dream of a “car-free” America, where individuals are herded onto public transit or forced to walk and bike their way through life, regardless of their needs or preferences."
Some of the founders of the Congress for the New Urbanism are libertarian. They came into existence because of the shared interest in building places that allowed all sorts of organic growth and options. Of course there are individuals who call themselves new urbanists and also think fossil fuels & automobiles should be outlawed. But it's silly for the opposition to claim *that's* what NU is. They have to, really, because arguing against the philosophy of human-scale design quickly becomes embarrassing.
The smugness of the Federalist article makes it hard to read. Luckily, I do believe that conservatives are slowly realizing how insane our current development pattern is. Less so with the Gen X crowd, but more so with Gen Z. I talk about car-centrism and its problems with my conservative friends and family and noticed that the younger people are much more receptive and open to human-centric design. We have to keep changing minds. Keep up the good work!
Recommend to everyone the ‘Messy City’ podcast. The host has on guests from a variety of backgrounds, conservative leaning, liberal and none of the above. In my experience, the hostility from the pro-suburban Right is matched by the condescension of the anti-development Left. Once you make policy making a team sport, there is little room left for common sense.
Re: "large-scale projects with so-called economic development giveaways"
Another downside to large-scale urban projects is that they are so big and complex that it's easy to hide "padded" invoices and fake jobs for cronies ("Director, Horizontal Liaison Framework"). As well, in Canada it's standard operating procedure for consortium to say the project will cost $XXX M, then fail to do the work and mow through the money--and then cone back for a second disbursement of $XXX M.
“Misunderstanding” is a quaintly charitable way of putting it.
It reminds me of that time when people all of a sudden “misunderstood” what a 15 minute city is.
Seriously though, I think we probably lack a shared understanding of what a city is. This quote about “[children playing] on a shared a rooftop patio shared with strangers” and saying that as if that is a bad thing.
To many people a city works like a space colony — where you’re in your little bubble of habitat at home, and you have to get in some sort of space capsule to cross the space in between to other bits of habitat, like the mall or something. What is the median value in your neighbourhood of “time since you last left your property while not in a car”?
Thanks for reading that so we don’t have to. 😱 Honestly, I’m amazed at how far people will reach to manufacture “conflict” between “factions” that are largely also made up — not based on real people or our true needs and aspirations. It’s ridiculous.
I think to some degree, conservatism is a reactionary movement, and reactionaries will latch onto anything that can create clicks and views in their media outlets.
I appreciate Point #10. As a libertarian I want to see different land use, housing and transportation options compete on a level playing field without subsidies or unchecked externalities. However, a lot of the "urbanist" commentary I see on the Stack seems designed to provoke the reaction:
"At the heart of this movement is a fanatical hatred of the automobile. New Urbanists dream of a “car-free” America, where individuals are herded onto public transit or forced to walk and bike their way through life, regardless of their needs or preferences."
Some of the founders of the Congress for the New Urbanism are libertarian. They came into existence because of the shared interest in building places that allowed all sorts of organic growth and options. Of course there are individuals who call themselves new urbanists and also think fossil fuels & automobiles should be outlawed. But it's silly for the opposition to claim *that's* what NU is. They have to, really, because arguing against the philosophy of human-scale design quickly becomes embarrassing.
Great stuff. I hope they let you publish a response!
This is a nice case. Sadly I’ve learned to never underestimate the capacity of partisans to sink deeper into oppositional defiance disorder.
The smugness of the Federalist article makes it hard to read. Luckily, I do believe that conservatives are slowly realizing how insane our current development pattern is. Less so with the Gen X crowd, but more so with Gen Z. I talk about car-centrism and its problems with my conservative friends and family and noticed that the younger people are much more receptive and open to human-centric design. We have to keep changing minds. Keep up the good work!
Recommend to everyone the ‘Messy City’ podcast. The host has on guests from a variety of backgrounds, conservative leaning, liberal and none of the above. In my experience, the hostility from the pro-suburban Right is matched by the condescension of the anti-development Left. Once you make policy making a team sport, there is little room left for common sense.
Kevin is great. Coincidentally, we met each other through the Congress for New Urbanism.
Re: "large-scale projects with so-called economic development giveaways"
Another downside to large-scale urban projects is that they are so big and complex that it's easy to hide "padded" invoices and fake jobs for cronies ("Director, Horizontal Liaison Framework"). As well, in Canada it's standard operating procedure for consortium to say the project will cost $XXX M, then fail to do the work and mow through the money--and then cone back for a second disbursement of $XXX M.
“Misunderstanding” is a quaintly charitable way of putting it.
It reminds me of that time when people all of a sudden “misunderstood” what a 15 minute city is.
Seriously though, I think we probably lack a shared understanding of what a city is. This quote about “[children playing] on a shared a rooftop patio shared with strangers” and saying that as if that is a bad thing.
To many people a city works like a space colony — where you’re in your little bubble of habitat at home, and you have to get in some sort of space capsule to cross the space in between to other bits of habitat, like the mall or something. What is the median value in your neighbourhood of “time since you last left your property while not in a car”?
Thanks for reading that so we don’t have to. 😱 Honestly, I’m amazed at how far people will reach to manufacture “conflict” between “factions” that are largely also made up — not based on real people or our true needs and aspirations. It’s ridiculous.
I think to some degree, conservatism is a reactionary movement, and reactionaries will latch onto anything that can create clicks and views in their media outlets.
Excellent list you give there of specific ways govt regulations are hurting people and preventing "new urbanism".
Glad you liked it. ;)