My name's Justin Moore, I live in Adelaide, Australia. I conceived, wrote, designed and maintain this site. I know most of it's true and believe the rest.
I've been an anti-car activist for decades with Friends of The Earth, Greenpeace, local groups and local
governments but this site is:
- not associated with any group,
- not a reflection of any group's policy, praxes or priorities (Greenpeace's Car Free Cities campaign implies some ban; but I think they haven't said it means a general urban ban),
- not related to my job or studies or funded by anyone but myself.
I have negligible "expert" qualifications (Cert. Pro Writing, Dip. InfoTech, Cert. Env. Mgmt) but I am a sometime Mensan and the site is the product of ten years thinking and research, since I naively set aside a couple of weeks to compile an environmental audit of the car. My personal reason for writing it is to have somewhere to direct people rather than repeating the same argument in social interaction.
In cities I neither drive nor accept lifts in cars; I used to motorcycle and now I walk, take transit or, rarely, taxis. This is not an ideal I expect others to follow under current conditions. I hold no hope that it would make much difference if some did follow the example. Carlessness is a disadvantage in a car dominated society and one would need superhuman insensitivity to have not encountered the social and economic car dependence of many people (it is the hegemonic position after all). If, as people tend to do, one expects commendations and exhortations to change some minor personal behaviour and save the environment then I'll disappoint, I think it's a bit more systemic and ingrained than that. Minimizing car use would be good if everyone did it; but everyone won't, and I won't recommend wasted effort; but as the disasters created by continued car hegemony do and will affect everyone, not just drivers, it can't be left at that. My own avoidance of the car is for clarity of mind and karma as an opponent and though I prefer to associate with other non-drivers this is for practical reasons as much as anything.
I think the case for banning cars in cities is almost as clear and irrefutable as for two and two making four, this dry certainty manifests in implacability that others persist in calling "passionate idealism". I don't like being called an idealist for knowing that real problems require real solutions (as opposed to pretend solutions), regardless of how the solution is viewed by any prevailing ideology; I think "sane" a more apposite term. I'm not passionate about it, and study contrary arguments, there's more light than heat here; except regarding baseless denials or distortions, and anyone can react badly to someone insisting two and two make five, particularly when the consequences are serious.
The car problem is a tragedy of the commons and because it would produce a relative disadvantage for the non-driving group apolitical means are useless. Nothing can be accomplished by "private group", depoliticised, "act only as consumers" logic. The only quasi-idealistic thing I ask of people is that they vote for a government or referendum that will ban cars in cities, i.e.: change the conditions. I give reasons for confidence in this opinion and for disdaining lesser measures. As the site argues, only a ban tackles the problems' scale and getting a majority vote will be hard enough without getting involved trying to convince people to accept a relative disadvantage and martyr themselves for the environment.
The contents of the site are copyright, reproduction of any of the contents is permitted without request
under 2 conditions
1. It is faithfully reproduced and not distorted or edited beyond abridgement
2. It is acknowledged with
From the Ban The Car site, by Justin Moore. http://www.banthecar.com/index.html.
I've just discovered that U.S. "Law" would allow every idea in this site to be suppressed by the simple expedient of patenting them and refusing licence. Obviously there's more than one kind of rogue state and criminal regime.
Thus the following:
You can buy a printed version of these essays by sending me a cheque or money order for AU$ 10,000. (email for my address).
I don't recommend you do this, but selling a printed version is legally required in the U.S.A. to ensure the ideas presented become definable as "prior art" and cannot be patented by anyone.
I thank Peter Henningsen and his web essay site
Complicity and the Brain: Dynamics in Attractor Space
for making free with this information.
Any comment on the site can be addressed to Justin Moore at email@example.com